Biomarkers and uses thereof for selecting immunotherapy intervention

ABSTRACT

The instant disclosure provides biomarkers and methods for identifying subjects at risk of developing cytokine release syndrome (CRS), neurotoxicity, or both after adoptive immunotherapy to guide preemptive intervention, modified therapy, or the like. For example, adverse event biomarkers may be measured in a subject before pre-conditioning chemotherapy, before immunotherapy (e.g., adoptive immunotherapy infusion comprising a chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-modified T cell), or shortly after pre-conditioning chemotherapy and/or immunotherapy. Exemplary biomarkers include temperature, cytokine levels and endothelial activation biomarkers, such as angiopoietin-2, von Willebrand factor (vWF), ratio of angiopoietin-2 to angiopoietin-1, and ratio of ADAMTS13 to vWF. Also provided are methods of treating subjects identified as at risk of developing cytokine release syndrome (CRS), neurotoxicity, or both to minimize such potential adverse events.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a divisional application of U.S. patent applicationSer. No. 16/484,788, filed Aug. 8, 2019 (now allowed), which is a 371national stage application of International Patent Application No.PCT/US2018/017655, filed Feb. 9, 2018, which claims the benefit of U.S.Provisional Application Nos. 62/456,798, filed Feb. 9, 2017, and62/544,709, filed Aug. 11, 2017, which applications are incorporatedherein by reference in their entirety.

STATEMENT OF GOVERNMENT INTEREST

This invention was made with government support under CA136551 awardedby the National Institutes of Health. The government has certain rightsin the invention.

BACKGROUND

Lymphodepletion chemotherapy followed by infusion of T cells that aregenetically modified to express a chimeric antigen receptor (i.e.,CAR-modified T cells) has produced high response rates in clinicalstudies, such as in refractory B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia(B-ALL), chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma(NHL) (Davila et al., Sci. Transl. Med. 6:224ra25, 2014; Kochenderfer etal., J. Clin. Oncol. 33:540, 2015; Maude et al., N. Engl. J. Med.371:1507, 2014; Porter et al., Sci. Transl. Med. 7:303ra139, 2015;Turtle et al. I, J. Clin. Invest. 126:2123, 2016; Turtle et al. II, Sci.Transl. Med. 8:355ra116, 2016). Durable complete responses (CRs) withoutsubsequent anti-tumor therapy have been observed in a subset of patientswho received CD19 CAR-T cell therapy, demonstrating the potential ofthis approach (Turtle et al. I and II, 2016; Porter et al., 2015).

For example, when infused antigen-specific CAR-modified T cellsencounter an antigen positive target cell, in vivo signaling through theCAR induces CAR-T cell proliferation, cytokine secretion, and targetcell lysis (Turtle et al., Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 100:252, 2016). Withinapproximately 2 weeks after CAR-modified T cell infusion, some patientswill develop cytokine release syndrome (CRS), a systemic inflammatoryresponse initiated by T cell activation and characterized by fever andhypotension (Brudno and Kochenderfer, Blood 127:3321, 2016; Lee et al.,Blood 124:188, 2014). Neurologic adverse events are frequently observedin association with CRS after CAR-modified T cell immunotherapy, and inrare instances can be fatal (Davila et al., 2014; Kochenderfer et al.,2015; Maude et al., 2014; Porter et al., 2015; Turtle et al. I, 2016;Turtle et al. II, 2016); however, a detailed clinical description of thesyndrome has not been reported and the mechanisms of neurotoxicity havenot been identified.

After adoptive transfer, activation of CAR-T cells by encounter withCD19⁺ tumor or normal B cells results in proliferation of CAR-T cells,lysis of the target cell, and cytokine secretion, which can beassociated with the clinical presentations of cytokine release syndrome(CRS) and neurotoxicity. CRS after CD19 CAR-T cell therapy occurs in54-91% of patients, including severe CRS in 8.3-43% (Turtle II, 2016;Turtle I, 2016; Kochenderfer et al., 2015; Porter et al., 2015; Davilaet al., 2014; Locke et al., Mol Ther. 25:285, 2017; Brentjens et al.,Blood. 118:4817, 2011; Porter et al., N. Engl. J. Med. 365:725, 2011).CRS presents with fever, hypotension, coagulopathy and capillary leak,and, if severe, can be fatal; however, a comprehensive description ofthe kinetics of presentation and biomarkers of CRS in a large cohort ofpatients has not been reported (Brudno and Kochenderfer, Blood.127:3321, 2016). The increased availability of CD19 CAR-T cell therapiesin multicenter trials highlight the need to provide clinicians treatingB-ALL, NHL and CLL patients with a detailed description of the clinicalsyndrome of CRS.

Hence, there remains a need in the art for biomarkers to identify asubject at risk of having an adverse event in response to immunotherapy.The present disclosure meets such needs, and further provides otherrelated advantages.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIGS. 1A-1G. Frequency, kinetics, and treatment of neurotoxicity. (A)The numbers of patients with each overall neurotoxicity grade are shownfor the entire cohort and each disease. The diameters of each pie chartindicate the relative size of each subgroup. (B) The swimmer plot(bottom) shows the kinetics of the severity of neurotoxicity in eachpatient who developed neurotoxicity through 28 days after CAR-modified Tcell infusion (n=53). Each row represents one patient and the colorsindicate the highest grade of neurotoxicity recorded on each day. Thegraph (top) shows the mean of the highest grade of neurotoxicityoccurring in all patients on each day after CAR T cell infusion. (C)Numbers of patients with each grade of neurotoxicity and CRS. Cumulativeincidences of (D) fever, (E) any grade of neurotoxicity, and (F) thepeak grade of neurotoxicity, are shown for patients with grade1-2 andgrade≥3 neurotoxicity. (G) The severity of neurotoxicity is shown in allpatients with neurotoxicity who received treatment with tocilizumab(arrowheads) and/or corticosteroids (stars). The colors indicate thehighest neurotoxicity grade for each day.

FIGS. 2A-2I. Brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings in patientswith severe neurotoxicity after CD19 CAR-T cell immunotherapy. Symmetricedema of deep structures in a patient with grade5 neurotoxicity hasFLAIR hyperintensities that were seen in the bilateral thalami (A) andthe pons (B, arrowheads), consistent with vasogenic edema. Punctatehemorrhages in the most affected areas are seen as T2 dark lesions (B,arrow). (C) Global edema with blurring of the gray-white junction(stars) and slit-like ventricles on FLAIR imaging in a patient withgrade5 neurotoxicity. (D) Diffuse leptomeningeal enhancement in apatient with grade5 neurotoxicity. White matter FLAIR hyperintensities(E) that in some cases were contrast enhancing (F; T1+gadolinium) in apatient with grade3 neurotoxicity without focal neurologic deficits onexam. Cytotoxic edema of the cortical ribbon is seen on diffusionweighted imaging (G) and concomitant cortical swelling on FLAIR (H). Inthe same patient, injury progressed to irreversible cortical laminarnecrosis indicated by T1 hyperintensities within the cortical ribbon 10days later (I).

FIGS. 3A-3F. Severe neurotoxicity is associated with vasculardysfunction. (A) Absolute counts of CD4⁺/EGFRt⁺ and CD8⁺/EGFRt⁺ CAR-Tcells in blood, and the percentages of CD4⁺/EGFRt⁺ cells within CD4⁺ Tcells and of CD8⁺/EGFRt⁺ cells within CD8⁺ T cells in the indicated timewindows after CAR-T cell infusion are shown in patients withoutneurotoxicity (grey) or with grade1-2 (orange) or 3-5 (red)neurotoxicity. (B) Minimum (min) or maximum (max) values of vital signs,serum protein and albumin concentration, and body weight are shownwithin the indicated time periods. Pre-chemo, before lymphodepletionchemotherapy. Pre-infusion, before CAR-T cell infusion. SBP, systolicblood pressure. DBP, diastolic blood pressure. HR, heart rate. RR,respiratory rate. (C) Minimum (min) or maximum (max) values ofcoagulation parameters are shown within the indicated time periods. PT,prothrombin time. APTT, activated partial thromboplastin time. (D)Maximum serum CRP, ferritin, IFN-γ, IL-6, and TNF-α concentrationswithin indicated time periods are shown, according to severity ofneurotoxicity. Within each time window in all figures, the y-axis showsthe mean+/−standard error of the mean (SEM) of the values for allpatients. *0.001<p<0.005, **0.0001<p<0.001, ***p<0.0001 for theindicated time points for the comparison of grade0 vs 1-2 vs 3-5neurotoxicity. P values for TNF-α at 0-36 hours and 2-5 days afterCAR-modified T cell infusion were 0.038 and 0.022, respectively. (E)Maximum serum cytokine concentrations within the indicated time periodsare shown according to severity of neurotoxicity. Data represent themean+/−standard error of the mean (SEM). *0.001<p<0.005,**0.0001<p<0.001, ***p<0.0001 at the indicated time points for thecomparison of grade0 vs 1-2 vs 3-5 neurotoxicity. (F) The maximum serumIL-6 concentration and the day after CAR-T cell infusion at which themaximum IL-6 concentration was reached are shown for patients withgrade1-2 (yellow), 3 (orange) or 4-5 (red) neurotoxicity. All patientswith a serum IL-6 concentration above 501 pg/mL (horizontal line) withinthe first 6 days after CAR-modified T cell infusion developed grade≥4neurotoxicity.

FIGS. 4A-4F. Endothelial activation in neurotoxicity associated withCD19 CAR-T cell immunotherapy. (A) Ang-1 (left) and Ang-2 (center)concentrations and the Ang-2:Ang-1 ratio (right) in serum collectedapproximately 7 days after CAR-T cell infusion from a subset of patientswith grade0-3 (n=52) or ≥4 (n=7) neurotoxicity. The median (bar) andinterquartile range are shown. Each point represents data from onepatient. (B) vWF Ag concentration in serum from patients with grade0-3(n=45) or grade≥4 (n=7) neurotoxicity. Serum was collected approximately1 week after CAR-T cell infusion. Data represent the fold change fromthe vWF concentration in normal reference plasma (CRYOcheck, PrecisionBiologic, Dartmouth, NS, Canada; vWFAg 12.2 μg/mL). (C) Ang-2:Ang-1ratios in serum collected before lymphodepletion chemotherapy frompatients who subsequently developed grade0-3 (n=49) or ≥4 (n=6)neurotoxicity. The median (bar) and interquartile range are shown. (D)vWF string unit formation in HUVECs incubated with serum collected fromday 3-5 from patients who received CD19 CAR-T cells and developedgrade≥4 neurotoxicity (n=4) or from healthy donors (n=4). (E) vWF stringunit formation in HUVECs incubated with serum collected from patientswith grade≥4 (n=3) or grade0-3 (n=6) neurotoxicity between day 7 and 14after CAR-T cell infusion. The mean value of 2 samples collected on days7 and 10 was used for one patient without neurotoxicity. (F) HMW and LMWvWF multimers in serum from patients with grade≥4 (n=5) compared tograde0-3 (n=6) neurotoxicity. The mean+/−SEM are shown in (B)-(E).

FIGS. 5A-5F. Increased permeability of the BBB during neurotoxicity. CSFwas collected from patients before CAR-T cell infusion (Pre), duringacute neurotoxicity (Acute), and after recovery from acute neurotoxicityor ≥21 days after CAR-T cell infusion in those without neurotoxicity(Recovery). (A) Protein concentration and WBC counts in CSF in patientswho did (red) or did not (grey) develop neurotoxicity. Each pointrepresents data from a single patient. Box and whisker plots show theinterquartile range. (B) Paired CSF and blood samples collected on thesame day from individual patients with neurotoxicity, showing CD4+ andCD8⁺ CAR-T cells as a percentage of total CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ cells,respectively. Each line represents data from a single patient. (C) CD4⁺and CD8⁺ CAR-T cells as percentages of total CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ cells,respectively, in CSF. Each point represents data from a single patient.Box and whisker plots show the interquartile range. (D) Concentrationsof cytokines in paired serum and CSF samples obtained from patients whodeveloped neurotoxicity. Box and whisker plots show the median (bar) andinterquartile range (box). Each point represents data from one patient.*p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001. Paired tests were used to compare serumand CSF cytokines at a single timepoint. Unpaired tests were used forcomparisons between Pre and Acute timepoints. (E) IL-6 and VEGFconcentrations in supernatant from pericytes cultured with medium alone(Control), IFN-γ or TNF-α. Data are representative of 6 experiments andare expressed as the fold change (mean+/−SEM) compared to culture inmedium alone. (F) PDGFRβ and activated caspase-3 expression by humanbrain vascular pericytes incubated with IFN-γ. Data are expressed as thefold change (mean+/−SEM) compared to culture in medium alone (Control).

FIGS. 6A-6F. Endothelial activation and vascular disruption in CAR-Tcell neurotoxicity. (A) Hematoxylin and eosin staining of medullashowing red blood cell extravasation into the surrounding parenchyma andVirchow-Robin space in the setting of minimal arteriolar walldisruption. (B) Hematoxylin and eosin staining showing fibrinoid vesselwall necrosis and vascular occlusion. (C) Perivascular CD8⁺ T cellinfiltration. (D) Immunohistochemistry (IHC) for vWF showing vWF bindingto capillaries. (E) IHC for CD61 demonstrates intravascularmicrothrombi. (F) IHC for CD31 shows reduplicated and disruptedendothelium. Size bars (100 μm) are shown.

FIGS. 7A and 7B. Biomarkers to predict grade≥4 neurotoxicity. (A) Aclassification tree model using temperature and serum IL-6 and/or MCP-1concentrations within 36 hours of CAR-T cell infusion predicts with highsensitivity and high specificity subsequent grade≥4 neurotoxicity. (B)Ang-2:Ang-1 ratios in serum collected before lymphodepletionchemotherapy from patients who subsequently developed grade0-3 (n=49) or≥4 (n=6) neurotoxicity. Endothelial activation biomarkers can predictpatients at risk of neurotoxicity from CAR-T cell immunotherapy. Box andwhisker plots show the median and interquartile range. Each pointrepresents data from one patient.

FIG. 8 . Presentation, management, and outcomes of patients with grade≥4CRS. Colors on the swimmer plot indicate the CRS grade on each daythrough 28 days after CAR-T cell infusion in all patients who developedgrade≥4 CRS. The duration of grade≥3 neurotoxicity and interventionswith tocilizumab and/or corticosteroids are indicated in the figure.ALL-2 developed dialysis-dependent acute kidney injury (AKI) through day26 followed by resolution of CRS-associated organ toxicity (grade0) onday 37. ALL-3 died 4 months after CAR-T cell infusion with irreversibleneurotoxicity, despite resolution of fever and hypotension associatedwith CRS on day 13 after CAR-T cell infusion. NHL-1 had ongoing grade1AKI at last available laboratory value on day 83. Doses of medications:dexamethasone 10 mg intravenous (IV) or oral, methylprednisolone 1 g IV,tocilizumab 4-8 mg/kg IV. NT, neurotoxicity.

FIGS. 9A-9D. Kinetics of presentation of CRS and neurotoxicity. (A)Cumulative incidence curve for first fever≥38° C. in patients withgrade1-3 (n=82) or grade CRS (n=10). (B) Mean±SEM of the maximumtemperature after CAR-T cell infusion. Kruskal-Wallis test, ***P<0.0001,**0.0001<P<0.001, *0.001<P<0.005. (C) Incidence and grading ofneurotoxicity within each CRS grade. (D) The median time of onset offever≥38° C. (red, n=92) or neurotoxicity (blue, n=53) after CAR-T cellinfusion. One patient with grade2 CRS who developed hypotension withoutfever is not included. NT, neurotoxicity; Pre-chemo, prior to the startof lymphodepletion chemotherapy; Pre-infusion, before CAR-T cellinfusion; h, hours; d, days after CAR-T cell infusion.

FIGS. 10A-10G. Hemodynamic instability and clinical capillary leak ingrade≥4 CRS. Mean±SEM of the minimum systolic and diastolic bloodpressure (A-B), maximum heart and respiratory rates (C-D), minimum serumprotein and albumin concentration (E-F), and weight gain from the startof lymphodepletion (G) are shown at the indicated times after CAR-T cellinfusion. Kruskal-Wallis test, ***P<0.0001, **0.0001<P<0.001,*0.001<P<0.005. Pre-chemo, prior to the start of lymphodepletionchemotherapy; Pre-infusion, before CAR-T cell infusion; h, hours; d,days after CAR-T cell infusion. Grey shading indicates normal range.

FIGS. 11A-11K. Hematopoietic toxicity, laboratory coagulopathy, andendothelial injury in grade≥4 CRS. The minimum ANC (A), hematocrit (B),hemoglobin (C) and platelet count (D) are shown for patients receivingCy/Flu lymphodepletion at the indicated times after CAR-T cell infusion(n=104). (E) Total transfused units of packed red blood cells (pRBC),platelets (P10, and cryoprecipitate (Cryo) in the first 28 days afterCAR-T cell infusion. The maximum PT (F) and aPTT (G), minimum fibrinogen(H), and maximum d-dimer (I) concentrations are shown at the indicatedtimes after CAR-T cell infusion. (J) The fold change in VWFconcentration in serum from a subset of patients at the peak of CAR-Tcell expansion (n=60; grade0, n=12; grade1-3, n=39; grade≥4 CRS, n=9)compared to the VWF concentration in pooled normal plasma (12.2 μg/mL;CRYOcheck, Precision Biologic, Dartmouth, NS, Canada). (K) TheAng-2:Ang-1 ratio at the peak of CAR-T cell expansion (n=60; grade0,n=12; grade1-3, n=39; grade≥4 CRS, n=9). For (A-D) and (F-I): Datarepresent the mean+/−SEM. P values were determined using theKruskal-Wallis test, ***P<0.0001, **0.0001<P<0.001, *0.001<P<0.005.Pre-chemo, prior to the start of lymphodepletion chemotherapy;Pre-infusion, before CAR-T cell infusion; h, hours; d, days after CAR-Tcell infusion. Grey shading indicates normal range. For (E, J, K): Eachpoint represents data from one patient. The median and interquartilerange [IQR] are shown. P values were determined using the Wilcoxon test,Gr, grade.

FIGS. 12A-12H. CAR-T cell counts in blood and estimated probabilities ofresponse or toxicity. The absolute number (A-B) and percentage (C-D) ofCD8⁺ (left) and CD4⁺ (right) CAR-T cells in blood. The mean±SEM of themaximum values are shown; P values were determined using theKruskal-Wallis test, ***P<0.0001, **0.0001<P<0.001, *0.001<P<0.005. h,hours; d, days after CAR-T cell infusion. Estimated probabilities bylogistic regression of grade≥2 CRS and grade≥3 neurotoxicity (NT) atpeak CD8⁺ (E) and CD4⁺ (F) CAR-T cell counts in blood. Estimatedprobabilities by logistic regression of bone marrow complete response(CR) in ALL and CLL patients by flow cytometry, and CR or overallresponse (OR) in NHL patients according to Cheson imaging criteria(2014) at peak CD8⁺ (G) and CD4⁺ (H) CAR-T cell counts in blood. Lymphnode CR in CLL patients is not depicted due to the limited cohort sizeavailable for analysis. P values are color-coded to indicate theassociation between the CAR-T cell peak counts and outcomes.

FIGS. 13A-13I. Biomarkers for early prediction of grade CRS. (A-H)Concentrations of listed cytokines in serum obtained from patients atthe indicated time points. Pre-chemo, prior to the start oflymphodepletion chemotherapy; Pre-infusion, before CAR-T cell infusion;h, hours; d, days after CAR-T cell infusion. P values were determinedusing the Kruskal-Wallis test, ***P<0.0001, **0.0001<P<0.001,*0.001<P<0.005. (I) An algorithm for early identification of patients athigh risk of grade A CRS using classification tree modeling. Early highfever (≥38.9° C.) within the first 36 hours after CAR-T cell infusiontriggers evaluation of serum MCP-1 concentration. Patients withfever≥38.9° C. and serum MCP-1≥1343.5 pg/mL are at high risk forsubsequent development of grade≥4 CRS. Gr, grade.

FIGS. 14A-14I. Hepatic and renal function, CRP, ferritin, and bloodmonocyte counts in CRS. (A-I) Maximum serum AST (A), ALT (B), ALP (C),bilirubin (D), BUN (E), creatinine (F), C-reactive protein (CRP; G), andferritin (H) concentrations, and blood monocyte counts (I) at theindicated times. Mean±SEM values are shown; P values were determinedusing the Kruskal-Wallis test, ***P<0.0001, **0.0001<P<0.001,*0.001<P<0.005. Pre-chemo, prior to the start of lymphodepletionchemotherapy; Pre-infusion, before CAR-T cell infusion; h, hours; d,days after CAR-T cell infusion. Grey shading represents the normalrange.

FIGS. 15A-15C. Biomarkers of endothelial activation in CRS. (A) Serumangiopoietin (Ang)-1 and Ang-2 concentrations at the peak of expansionof CAR-T cells (Mann-Whitney test). Von Willebrand Factor (VWF)concentration in patient serum expressed as the fold change over poolednormal serum (B) and the Ang-2:Ang-1 ratio (C) at the following times:prior to the start of lymphodepletion chemotherapy (Pre-chemo); beforeCAR-T cell infusion (Pre-infusion), and on day 1 after CAR-T cellinfusion (Kruskal-Wallis test, Grade 0 vs 1-3 vs 4-5). For (A-C), n=60(grade0, n=12; grade1-3, n=39; grade≥4 CRS, n=9).

FIGS. 16A-16G. Angiopoietin-1, angiopoietin-2 and sVCAM-1 concentrationswere assessed in serum from patients with ALL, NHL or CLL treated withlymphodepletion chemotherapy and CD19-targeted chimeric antigen receptor(CAR)-modified T cells. Samples were collected from 10 patients beforelymphodepletion chemotherapy (Pre-chemo), on the day of CAR-T cellinfusion prior to commencing the infusion (d=0), the day after CAR-Tcell infusion (d=1), and during acute clinical toxicity 4-8 days afterCAR-T cell infusion (d4-8). (A) Ang-1, (B) Ang-2, (C) sVCAM-1, and (D)platelet counts were measured for each patient and grouped by severityof neurotoxicity (patients 1-3, grade0; patient 4, grade3; patients5-10, grade4-5). Patients with grade4-5 neurotoxicity had (E) highAng-2:Ang-1 ratios, (F) high sVCAM-1:Ang-1 ratios during acute toxicity(black) and on the first day after CAR-T cell infusion (blue), providingan opportunity for early intervention with treatment withcorticosteroids, anti-cytokine antibodies or agents that modify theangiopoietin-Tie-VCAM1 pathway. In addition, some patients who developedgrade 4-5 neurotoxicity (6, 9, 10) had high Ang-2:Ang-1 or sVCAM-1:Ang-1ratios before chemotherapy (green) or before CAR-T cell infusion (red),providing an opportunity to modify chemotherapy or CAR-T cell dosing andre-evaluating risk before starting therapy. (G) Ang-1 vs platelets: acorrelation study of Ang-1 vs platelets (the source of Ang-1) in allsamples from this experiment is provided.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

The instant disclosure provides methods for diagnosing or detecting therisk of an adverse event associated with immunotherapy, such as cytokinerelease syndrome (CRS), neurotoxicity or both. Risk factors that areassociated with the incidence and severity of subsequent CRS wereidentified before and after CAR-T cell infusion, allowing identificationof patients at high risk of severe toxicity and candidates for earlyintervention. In particular, various biomarkers examined individuallyand in various combinations indicate what therapies to apply, whattherapeutic regimens to apply, what therapies to adjust, what therapiesto avoid, or any combination thereof that will be the most beneficial toa subject at risk of having an adverse event associated withimmunotherapy. Such biomarkers include the subject's temperature, levelsof inflammatory cytokines and the presence of endothelial activationbiomarkers. Exemplary endothelial activation biomarkers includeangiopoietin-2 (encoded by ANGPT2), angiopoietin-1 (encoded by ANGPT1),vascular cell adhesion molecule 1 (VCAM-1, encoded by VCAM1, which canbe the soluble form, sVCAM-1), a ratio of angiopoietin-2 toangiopoietin-1, a ratio of VCAM-1 to angiopoietin-1, von Willebrandfactor (vWF), or a ratio of ADAMTS13 to vWF.

The instant disclosure further provides methods for treating hematologicmalignancies in mammalian subjects, comprising obtaining the resultsfrom the methods comprising identifying the subject as at risk ofdeveloping an adverse event associated with cellular immunotherapy whenthe adverse event biomarker is altered as compared to a normal sample;and administering to the subject a pre-emptive treatment, an alteredcellular immunotherapy regimen, or both to minimize the risk for thepotential adverse event.

By way of background, lymphodepletion chemotherapy and targeted chimericantigen receptor (CAR)-modified T (CAR-T) cell infusion for hematologicmalignancies, including relapsed and refractory malignancies, can becomplicated by various adverse events (AEs), including cytokine releasesyndrome (CRS), neurotoxicity, or both. For example, in CD19-specificCAR-T cell immunotherapy patients, the incidence of grade≥3neurotoxicity is similar to that described in previous reports (Davilaet al., 2014; Kochenderfer et al., 2015; Maude et al., 2014; Porter etal., 2015). The instant disclosure provides an approach to reduce therisk of, for example, CD19 CAR-T cell therapy by early identification ofpatients who are at high risk of developing severe CRS at a time whenintervention or modification of the treatment regimen could beinstituted. Multivariable analysis identified baseline and treatmentrisk factors for CRS, including those associated with more robust CAR-Tcell expansion, such as higher marrow tumor burden, Cy/Flulymphodepletion, and higher CAR-T cell dose. Other factors that wereassociated with CRS (which may reflect the higher tumor burden in thesepatients) included thrombocytopenia and manufacturing of CAR-T cellsfrom bulk CD8+ T cells.

This disclosure also provides detailed clinical, radiologic andpathologic characterization of neurotoxicity associated with CD19 CAR-Tcell infusion that will facilitate management of patients undergoingCD19 CAR-T cell therapy. For example, the Examples herein show thatcytokine-mediated endothelial activation causing coagulopathy, capillaryleak, and blood-brain barrier (BBB) disruption, which allows transit ofhigh concentrations of systemic cytokines into the cerebrospinal fluid(CSF). In autopsy studies of two patients who had fatal toxicity,endothelial activation was identified, resulting in loss of cerebralvascular integrity in one patient manifesting as multifocal hemorrhage.In certain embodiments, a predictive classification tree algorithm basedon the presence of fever and high serum IL-6 and/or CCL2 (MCP-1)concentrations to identify patients within the first 12-48 hours ofCAR-T cell infusion who are at high risk of subsequent severeneurotoxicity and are candidates for early intervention. Finally, thepresent disclosure provides that patients with evidence of endothelialactivation before lymphodepletion, before CAR-T cell infusion, or bothare at increased risk of neurotoxicity after immunotherapy, and arecandidates for early intervention, modification of the treatmentregimen, or both.

Prior to setting forth this disclosure in more detail, it may be helpfulto an understanding thereof to provide definitions of certain terms tobe used herein. Additional definitions are set forth throughout thisdisclosure.

In the present description, any concentration range, percentage range,ratio range, or integer range is to be understood to include the valueof any integer within the recited range and, when appropriate, fractionsthereof (such as one tenth and one hundredth of an integer), unlessotherwise indicated. Also, any number range recited herein relating toany physical feature, such as polymer subunits, size or thickness, areto be understood to include any integer within the recited range, unlessotherwise indicated.

As used herein, the terms “about” and “consisting essentially of”mean±20% of the indicated range, value, or structure, unless otherwiseindicated. In particular embodiments, the term “about” means±2.5% of theindicated range or value for each of the following terms only:“sensitivity,” “specificity,” and “temperature.”

It should be understood that the terms “a” and “an” as used herein referto “one or more” of the enumerated components. The use of thealternative (e.g., “or”) should be understood to mean either one, both,or any combination thereof of the alternatives or enumerated components.As used herein, the terms “include,” “have” and “comprise” are usedsynonymously, which terms and variants thereof are intended to beconstrued as non-limiting.

As used herein, “hyperproliferative disorder” refers to excessive growthor proliferation as compared to a normal or undiseased cell.Representative hyperproliferative disorders include tumors, cancers,neoplastic tissue, carcinoma, sarcoma, malignant cells, pre-malignantcells, as well as non-neoplastic or non-malignant hyperproliferativedisorders (e.g., adenoma, fibroma, lipoma, leiomyoma, hemangioma,fibrosis, restenosis, as well as autoimmune diseases such as rheumatoidarthritis, osteoarthritis, psoriasis, inflammatory bowel disease, or thelike). In certain embodiments, a hyperproliferative disorder comprises ahematologic malignancy, such as a lymphoma, a leukemia or a myeloma.

As used herein, “cancer recurrence” or “cancer relapse” is defined asthe return of cancer after treatment and after a period of time (e.g.,days, weeks, months or years) during which the cancer cannot bedetected. The cancer may come back in the same tissue or in other partsof the body.

As used herein, “prognosis” is the likelihood of the clinical outcomefor a subject afflicted with a specific disease or disorder. With regardto cancer, the prognosis is a representation of the likelihood(probability) that the subject will survive (such as for 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5years) and/or the likelihood that an adverse event (e.g., severecytokine release syndrome, severe neurotoxicity, or both). A “poorprognosis” indicates a greater than 50% chance that the subject will notsurvive to a specified time point (such as 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 years),and/or a greater than 50% chance that a severe adverse event will occur.In several examples, a poor prognosis indicates that there is a greaterthan 60%, 70%, 80%, or 90% chance that the subject will not surviveand/or a greater than 60%, 70%, 80% or 90% chance that a severe adverseevent will occur. Conversely, a “good prognosis” indicates a greaterthan 50% chance that the subject will survive to a specified time point(such as 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 years), and/or a greater than 50% chance thata severe adverse event will not occur. In several examples, a goodprognosis indicates that there is a greater than 60%, 70%, 80%, or 90%chance that the subject will survive and/or a greater than 60%, 70%, 80%or 90% chance that a severe adverse event will not occur.

The methods disclosed herein are used to detect biomarkers that indicatethe risk, diagnosis, progression, prognosis, or monitoring of an adverseevent associated with treatment of a hyperproliferative disorder, suchas a hematologic malignancy. “Biomarker” refers to a cell, particle,molecule, compound, or other chemical entity or biologic structure thatis an indicator of an abnormal biological condition (e.g., disease ordisorder). Exemplary biomarkers include proteins (e.g., antigens orantibodies), carbohydrates, cells, microparticles, viruses, nucleicacids, or small organic molecules. For example, a biomarker may be agene product that (a) is expressed at higher or lower levels, (b) has analtered ratio relative to another biomarker, (c) is present at higher orlower levels, (c) is a variant or mutant of the gene product, or (d) issimply present or absent, in a cell or tissue sample from a subjecthaving or suspected of having a disease as compared to an undiseasedtissue or cell sample from the subject having or suspected of having adisease, or as compared to a cell or tissue sample from a subject or apool of subjects not having or suspected of having the disease. That is,one or more gene products are sufficiently specific to the test samplethat one or more may be used to identify, predict, or detect thepresence of disease, risk of disease, risk of an adverse event, orprovide information for a proper or improved therapeutic regimen. Abiomarker may refer to two or more components or a ratio thereof (e.g.,proteins, nucleic acids, carbohydrates, or a combination thereof) thatbind together, associate non-covalently to form a complex, disrupt theassociation of a complex or two or more molecules or proteins (e.g.,angiopoietin-2 disrupts the complex of angiopoietin-1 and Tie2), or areaffected by the presence of the other (e.g., ADAMTS13 is a protease thatcleaves the von Willebrand factor (vWF) protein).

By “subject” is meant an organism having a hyperproliferative disease,such as a hematologic malignancy (e.g., lymphoma, leukemia, myeloma), orat risk of having an adverse event associated with immunotherapy againstsuch a disease. A subject may benefit from a particular therapeuticregimen described herein, which can be based on, for example, abiomarker ratio selected from von Willebrand factor antigen (vWF Ag) toADAMTS13 or angiopoietin-2 to angiopoietin-1 or VCAM-1 toangiopoietin-1, or a biomarker selected from fever, angiopoietin-2,angiopoietin-1, VCAM-1, vWF Ag, asymmetric dimethyl arginine (ADMA),IL-8, CCL26, endothelin-1, osteoprotegerin, CD142 tissue factor,C-reactive protein, E-selectin, P-selectin, P-selectin cofactorCD63/LAMP3, PAI-1, α-fucosyltransferase VI, circulating endothelialcells, endothelial microparticles, or any combination thereof. “Subject”also refers to an organism to which a small molecule, chemical entity,nucleic acid molecule, peptide, polypeptide or other therapy of thisdisclosure can be administered to treat, ameliorate or preventrecurrence of hyperproliferative disease, such as a hematologicmalignancy (e.g., lymphoma, leukemia, myeloma) and to minimize the riskof an adverse event (e.g., CRS, neurotoxicity). In certain embodiments,a subject is an animal, such as a mammal or a primate. In otherembodiments, a subject is a human or a non-human primate.

The term “biological sample” includes a blood sample, biopsy specimen,tissue explant, organ culture, biological fluid or specimen (e.g.,blood, serum, plasma, ascites, mucosa, lung sputum, saliva, feces,cerebrospinal fluid (CSF)) or any other tissue or cell or otherpreparation from a subject or a biological source. A “biological source”may be, for example, a human or non-human animal subject, a primary cellor cell culture or culture adapted cell line including cell linesgenetically engineered by human intervention to contain chromosomallyintegrated or episomal heterologous or recombinant nucleic acidmolecules, somatic cell hybrid cell lines, immortalized orimmortalizable cells or cell lines, differentiated or differentiatablecells or cell lines, transformed cells or cell lines, or the like. In apreferred embodiment, a biological sample is from a human, such as aserum sample. By “human patient” is intended a human subject who isafflicted with, at risk of developing or relapsing with, any disease orcondition associated with a hyperproliferative disorder, or of having anadverse event associated with the treatment of such a hyperproliferativedisorder.

A biological sample is referred to as a “test sample” when being testedor compared to a “control.” A “control,” as used herein, refers to anundiseased sample from the same patient and same tissue, a sample from asubject not having or suspected of having the disease of interest, apool of samples from various subjects not having or suspected of havingthe disease of interest (e.g., including samples from two to about 100subjects to about 1,000 subjects to about 10,000 subjects to about100,000 subjects), or data from one or more subjects not having orsuspected of having the disease of interest or having had an adverseevent associated with the treatment of the disease (e.g., a databasecontaining information on biomarker levels from one to about 100 toabout 500 to about 1,000 to about 5,000 to about 10,000 to about 100,000to about 1,000,000 or more subjects). In certain embodiments, a “testsample” is analyzed and the results (i.e., biomarker levels or activity)compared to a “control” comprising an average or certain identifiedbaseline level calculated from a database having data derived from aplurality of analyzed undiseased or normal samples.

A “reference” or “standard” may optionally be included in an assay,which provides a measure of a standard or known baseline level of atarget molecule, structure, or activity (e.g., “normal” level). Incertain embodiments, a reference sample is a pool of samples (e.g., 2,3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, or up to 100 or 1,000 or 10,000 samplescombined) from healthy individuals (i.e., not having or suspected ofhaving the disease of interest). In certain instances, a “test sample”and a “control sample” will be examined in an assay of the instantdisclosure along with a reference sample. In these instances, the “test”and “control” samples may be collectively referred to as the “targetsamples” since they are being compared to a reference sample.

When referring to the level of the one or more biomarker in a testsample, “elevated” compared to a control, as used herein, means astatistically significant increase in level or activity. In certainembodiments, the level or activity of biomarker(s) in a test sample iselevated compared to a control in a statistically significant manner. Infurther embodiments, the level or activity of biomarker(s) in a testsample is increased in a statistically significant manner. For example,the difference between test and control levels or control may be about2-fold, about 2.5-fold, about 3-fold, about 3.5-fold, about 4-fold,about 4.5-fold, about 5-fold, about 5.5-fold, about 6-fold, about6.5-fold, about 7-fold, about 7.5-fold, about 8-fold, about 8.5-fold,about 9-fold, about 9.5-fold, about 10-fold, about 15-fold, about20-fold, about 30-fold, or more. In certain instances, a statisticallysignificant difference includes when a biomarker or related activity ispresent in a test sample but is absent or undetectable in the control.

In certain embodiments of this disclosure, a subject or biologicalsource may be suspected of having or being at risk for developing anadverse event, such as CRS or neurotoxicity. In certain embodiments, asubject or biological source has a hematologic malignancy and may besuspected of or being at risk for developing an adverse event inassociation with a treatment of the hematologic malignancy (e.g.,lymphoma, leukemia, myeloma), and in certain other embodiments of thisdisclosure; the subject or biological source may be known to be free ofthe presence of such disease, disorder, or condition, or free of anyadverse event after treatment.

As used herein, “pre-diagnosis detection” refers to the detection ofbiomarkers after pre-treatment (e.g., lymphodepeletion), treatment(e.g., immunotherapy), both but prior to diagnosis of an adverse event.The phrase “pre-treatment detection” refers to the detection ofbiomarkers before pre-treatment (e.g., lymphodepeletion), treatment(e.g., immunotherapy), or both.

As used herein, “sensitivity” refers to a measure of the proportion ofsubjects having a disease (e.g., humans) who test positive for one ormore biomarkers before or shortly after receiving treatment for thedisease and who develop one or more adverse events shortly after thetreatment over the total population of subjects who develop one or moreadverse events (usually expressed as a percentage). For example, a humanpatient population having a hematologic cancer (e.g., leukemia,lymphoma, myeloma) and testing positive for one or more biomarkersbefore or shortly after (e.g., within 12 to 48 hours) immunotherapy(e.g., antibody, CAR-modified T cell), who develop one or more adverseevents (e.g., high fever, cytokine release syndrome (CRS),neurotoxicity) will be a measure of the proportion of the patientsidentified as at risk for developing such one or more adverse events(e.g., the percentage of hematologic cancer patients who are correctlyidentified as at risk of developing and do develop the one or moreadverse events based on detecting the one or more biomarkers before orshortly after treatment). In other words, “high sensitivity” (e.g., asensitivity of at least 85%, 86%, 87%, 88%, 89%, 90%, 91%, 92%, 93%,94%, 95%, 96%, 97%, 98%, 99% or 100%) means there are few or a lowpercentage of false negatives present and “low sensitivity” (e.g., asensitivity below about 70%) means there are many or a high percentageof false negatives present.

As used herein, “specificity” refers to a measure of the proportion ofsubjects having a disease (e.g., humans) who test negative for the oneor more biomarkers before or shortly after receiving treatment for thedisease and who do not develop one or more adverse events over the totalpopulation of subjects who do not develop the one or more adverse events(usually expressed as a percentage). For example, a human patientpopulation that has a hematopoietic cancer (e.g., leukemia, lymphoma)and tests negative for one or more biomarkers before or shortly after(e.g., within 12 to 48 hours) immunotherapy (e.g., antibody,CAR-modified T cell), who do not develop one or more adverse events(e.g., high fever, cytokine release syndrome (CRS), neurotoxicity) willbe a measure of the proportion of patients properly identified as not atrisk of developing such one or more adverse events (e.g., the percentageof hematopoietic cancer patients who are correctly identified as not atrisk of developing and do not develop the one or more adverse eventsbased on the absence of the one or more biomarkers before or shortlyafter treatment). In other words, “high specificity” (e.g., asensitivity of at least 85%, 86%, 87%, 88%, 89%, 90%, 91%, 92%, 93%,94%, 95%, 96%, 97%, 98%, 99% or 100%) means there are few or a lowpercentage of false positives present and “low specificity” (e.g., asensitivity below about 70%) means there are many or a high percentageof false positives present.

In certain embodiments, any of the methods described herein have asensitivity of at least about 85%, about 86%, about 87%, about 88%,about 89%, about 90%, about 91%, about 92%, about 93%, about 94%, about95%, about 96%, about 97%, about 98%, about 99%, about 100%, or 100%. Insome embodiments, the sensitivity for pre-diagnostic or pre-treatmentdetection of the risk for an adverse event associated with immunotherapy(e.g., CAR-T cell therapy), within about 36 hours of treatment, is about100% or 100%.

In certain embodiments, any of the methods described herein have aspecificity that is at least about 80%, about 81%, about 82%, about 83%,about 84%, about 85%, about 86%, about 87%, about 88%, about 89%, about90%, about 91%, about 92%, about 93%, about 94%, about 95%, about 96%,about 97%, about 98%, about 99%, or about 100%. In some embodiments, thespecificity for pre-diagnostic or pre-treatment detection of the riskfor an adverse event associated with immunotherapy (e.g., CAR-T celltherapy), within about 36 hours of treatment, is about 80% to about 95%.

In further embodiments, any of the methods described herein fordetecting the risk of an adverse event associated with immunotherapy,within about 36 hours of treatment, have a specificity that ranges fromabout 84% to about 92% and a sensitivity that is about 97.5%. In stillfurther embodiments, any of the methods described herein for detectingthe risk of an adverse event associated with immunotherapy, within about36 hours of treatment, have a specificity that is at least about 94% anda sensitivity that is about 100%.

The “percent identity” or “sequence identity,” as used herein, refers tothe percentage of nucleic acid or amino acid residues in one sequencethat are identical with the nucleic acid or amino acid residues in areference polynucleotide or polypeptide sequence, respectively, (i.e., %identity=number of identical positions/total number of positions×100)after aligning the sequences and introducing gaps, if necessary, toachieve the maximum percent sequence identity of two or more sequences.For proteins, conservative substitutions are not considered as part ofthe sequence identity. The comparison of sequences and determination ofpercent identity between two or more sequences is accomplished using amathematical algorithm, such as BLAST and Gapped BLAST programs at theirdefault parameters (e.g., Altschul et al., J. Mol. Biol. 215:403, 1990;Altschul et al., Nucleic Acids Res. 25:3389, 1997; see also BLASTN orBLASTP at www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/BLAST).

A “conservative substitution” is recognized in the art as a substitutionof one amino acid for another amino acid that has similar properties.Exemplary conservative substitutions are well known in the art (see,e.g., WO 97/09433, page 10, published Mar. 13, 1997; Lehninger,Biochemistry, Second Edition; Worth Publishers, Inc. NY:N.Y. (1975), pp.71-′7′7; Lewin, Genes IV, Oxford University Press, NY and Cell Press,Cambridge, Mass. (1990), p. 8).

“Treatment,” “treating” or “ameliorating” refers to either a therapeutictreatment or prophylactic/preventative treatment. A treatment istherapeutic if at least one symptom of disease (e.g., leukemia,lymphoma, myeloma) in an individual receiving treatment improves or atreatment may delay worsening of a progressive disease in an individual,or prevent onset of additional associated diseases or symptoms.

A “therapeutically effective amount (or dose)” or “effective amount (ordose)” refers to that amount of compound sufficient to result inamelioration of one or more symptoms of the disease being treated (e.g.,leukemia, lymphoma, myeloma) in a statistically significant manner, orminimizing the risk of an adverse event. When referring to an individualactive ingredient administered alone, a therapeutically effective doserefers to that ingredient alone. When referring to a combination, atherapeutically effective dose refers to combined amounts of the activeingredients that result in the therapeutic effect, whether administeredserially or simultaneously (in the same formulation or in separateformulations).

The term “pharmaceutically acceptable” refers to molecular entities andcompositions that do not produce allergic or other serious adversereactions when administered using routes well known in the art.

A “patient in need” or “subject in need” refers to a patient or subjectat risk of, or suffering from, an adverse event associated withimmunotherapy of such a disease, disorder or condition (e.g., leukemia,lymphoma, myeloma) that is amenable to treatment or amelioration with anearly intervention or altered therapy regimen as provided herein.

As used herein, the term “expression level” refers to the quantity ofprotein or gene expression by a cell or population of cells. Techniquesfor detecting and measuring protein expression are known to those ofskill in the art and include, for example, immunostaining,immunoprecipitation, fluorescence-labeling, BCA, and Western blot.Techniques for detecting and measuring gene expression are known tothose of skill in the art and include, for example, RT-PCR, in situhybridization, fluorescence-labeled oligonucleotide probes,radioactively labeled oligonucleotide probes, and Northern blot.

As used herein, the terms “antibody” or “binding fragment,” or “antibodyfragment” refer to their standard meanings within the art; that is, anintact immunoglobulin molecule or a fragment thereof that is capable ofbinding an antigen.

As used herein, the term “nanobody” refers to an antibody fragmentconsisting of a single monomeric variable domain of a heavy-chainantibody. Nanobodies bind selectively to a specific antigen and, beingsmaller in size relative to antibodies, may bind smaller targets and maybe favored over antibodies for cell transformation.

The term “T cell receptor,” as used herein, refers to an heterodimericantigen binding receptor derived from a T lymphocyte, comprising a analpha/beta polypeptide dimer or a gamma/delta polypeptide dimer, eachdimer comprising a variable region, a constant region, and an antigenbinding site.

Diagnosing or Detecting Risk of Adverse Events Before Immunotherapy

In one aspect, the present disclosure provides methods for reducing therisk of an adverse event associated with cellular immunotherapy,comprising (i) measuring the level of a biomarker of endothelialactivation in a biological sample from a mammalian subject having ahematologic malignancy and prior to cellular immunotherapy, wherein thebiomarker of endothelial activation is selected from angiopoietin-2,angiopoietin-1, VCAM-1, von Willebrand factor antigen (vWF Ag),asymmetric dimethyl arginine (ADMA), IL-8, CCL26, endothelin-1,osteoprotegerin, CD142 tissue factor, C-reactive protein, E-selectin,P-selectin, P-selectin cofactor CD63/LAMP3, PAI-1, α-fucosyltransferaseVI, circulating endothelial cells, endothelial microparticles, or anycombination thereof; and (ii) identifying the subject as at risk ofdeveloping an adverse event associated with cellular immunotherapy whenthe biomarker of endothelial activation is increased as compared to anormal sample, wherein the at risk subject receives pre-emptivetreatment for the adverse event, receives an altered cellularimmunotherapy regimen, or both.

As used herein, “risk” is the likelihood (probability) of a subjectdeveloping an adverse event associated with the treatment of ahematologic malignancy. Risk is a representation of the likelihood thata subject will develop an adverse event within a period of time aftertreatment (such as minutes, hours, or days later). A “high risk”indicates a greater than 50% chance that the subject will develop anadverse event after a treatment. In certain embodiments, a high riskindicates that there is a greater than 60%, 70%, 80%, or 90% chance thata subject will develop an adverse event after a treatment. Conversely, a“low risk” indicates a less than 50% chance that the subject willdevelop an adverse event after a treatment. In certain embodiments, alow risk indicates that there is a less than 10%, 20%, 30%, or 40%chance of developing an adverse event after a treatment.

In some embodiments, a subject is at risk because the subject belongs toa subpopulation identified by specific characteristics, such asbiomarkers of this disclosure, as well as age, gender, diet, ethnicity,or a combination thereof. A subject of a subpopulation is, for example,a human subject that is up to 6 years old, is from 6 years old to 17years old, or is at least 17 years of age or older.

In certain embodiments, the present disclosure provides methods forreducing the risk of an adverse event associated with cellularimmunotherapy wherein the biological sample is obtained beforepre-conditioning, before cellular immunotherapy administration, orbefore both. In some embodiments, a subject having a hematologicmalignancy and being treated with adoptive cellular immunotherapy (e.g.,CAR-T cell therapy) will receive a “pre-conditioning” (or simply a“conditioning”) regimen to reduce the tumor burden and to suppress therecipient's immune system to allow engraftment of the adoptive cellularimmunotherapy. The conditioning may be myeloablative in which total bodyirradiation (TBI) or alkylating agents are administered, at doses thatdo not allow autologous hematologic recovery and, therefore, includestem cell therapy. For example, myeloablative conditioning may compriseTBI at 10 Gy, with cyclophosphamide (CY) at 200 mg/kg and busulfan (BU)at 16 mg/kg. Other agents that can be used in a myeloablativeconditioning regimen at high doses, and in different combinations withCY or TBI, include melphalan (MEL), thiotepa (THIO), etoposide (VP16),and dimethylbusulfan. Alternatively, the conditioning may benon-myeloablative in which less toxic treatments are used and stem celltherapy is not needed. For example, non-myeloablative conditioningregimens include fludarabine and cyclophosphamide (Flu/CY), TBI at 2 Gyor 1 Gy, total lymphoid radiation (TLI), and anti-thymocyte globulin(ATG). In certain embodiments, conditioning for subjects with ahematologic malignancy (e.g., lymphoma, leukemia, myeloma) comprisesadministration daily for two to five days of cyclophosphamide (CY) at30-60 mg/kg alone or CY at 30-60 mg/kg and fludarabine (Flu) at 25-30mg/m².

Immunotherapy of this disclosure comprises cellular immunotherapy,including T cells modified to express on their cell surface a T cellreceptor (TCR), chimeric antigen receptor (CAR), T-ChARM, animmunoreactive T cell, an immunoreactive Natural Killer cell, or thelike. In certain embodiments, a T-ChARM comprises an extracellularcomponent and an intracellular component connected by a hydrophobicportion, wherein the extracellular component comprises a binding domainthat specifically binds a target, a tag cassette, and a connector regioncomprising a hinge, and wherein the intracellular component comprises aneffector domain. In further embodiments, a CAR comprises anextracellular component and an intracellular component connected by ahydrophobic portion, wherein the extracellular component comprises abinding domain that specifically binds a target, and a connector regioncomprising a hinge, and wherein the intracellular component comprises aneffector domain. In certain embodiments, a T-ChARM or CAR binding domainis a scFv, scTCR, receptor ectodomain, or ligand. T-ChARMs as disclosedin PCT Publication of WO 2015/095895 are incorporated herein byreference in their entirety. In certain embodiments, a T-ChARM or CARbinding domain is specific for CD19, CD20, CD22, CD37 or the like.

As used herein, the term “immunoreactive T cell” refers to a naturallyoccurring or engineered cytotoxic T lymphocyte (i.e., a CD8+ T cell)capable of killing a damaged or infected cell, and/or to a naturallyoccurring or engineered T helper cell (i.e., a CD4+ T cell) capable ofeffecting an immune response within the subject when presented with anantigen by an MHC1 marker. As used herein, the term “immunoreactiveNatural Killer cell” refers to a naturally occurring or engineeredcytotoxic lymphocyte of the innate immune system that is distinct from acytotoxic T lymphocyte and which is capable of recognized and killing adamaged or infected cell without prior activation by MHCI markers.

In certain embodiments, the present disclosure provides methods forreducing the risk of an adverse event associated with cellularimmunotherapy by measuring the level of one, two, three, four or fivebiomarkers of endothelial activation. Exemplary biomarkers ofendothelial activation include one or more components from endothelialWeibel-Palade bodies, such as angiopoietin-2, vWF Ag, IL-8, CCL26,endothelin-1, osteoprotegerin, CD142 tissue factor, P-selectin,P-selectin cofactor CD63/LAMP3, PAI-1, α-fucosyltransferase VI, or anycombination thereof. In particular embodiments, the biomarker ofendothelial activation measured comprises vWF Ag, angiopoietin-2,angiopoietin-1, VCAM-1, or a combination thereof.

In further embodiments, the present disclosure provides methods forreducing the risk of an adverse event associated with cellularimmunotherapy by measuring the level of at least one biomarker and atleast one co-factor to the biomarker, and determining a ratio betweenthe at least two markers. For example, an exemplary method of thisdisclosure comprises measuring the level of vWF Ag and measuring theactivity co-factor ADAMTS13, wherein a ratio of ADAMTS13 to vWF Ag thatis reduced as compared to a normal sample identifies the subject as atrisk of developing an adverse event associated with cellularimmunotherapy. In other embodiments, the method comprises measuring thelevel of angiopoietin-2, and the co-factor measured comprises measuringangiopoietin-1 level, wherein a ratio of angiopoietin-2 toangiopoietin-1 that is increased as compared to a normal sampleidentifies the subject as at risk of developing an adverse eventassociated with cellular immunotherapy. In further embodiments, themethod comprises measuring the level of VCAM-1, and the co-factormeasured comprises measuring angiopoietin-1 level, wherein a ratio ofVCAM-1 to angiopoietin-1 that is increased as compared to a normalsample identifies the subject as at risk of developing an adverse eventassociated with cellular immunotherapy.

In still further embodiments, a subject identified in a method of thisdisclosure as at risk for an adverse event receives a pre-emptivetreatment for the potential adverse event or an altered cellularimmunotherapy regimen comprising administering the cellularimmunotherapy at a reduced dose, a corticosteroid, an inflammatorycytokine antagonist, an endothelial cell stabilizing agent, or anycombination thereof. In particular embodiments, a pre-emptive treatmentcomprises a corticosteroid selected from dexamethasone, prednisone, orboth. In related embodiments, a pre-emptive treatment comprises aninflammatory cytokine antagonist comprising an anti-IL-6 antibody, ananti-IL-6R antibody, or both. In further embodiments, a pre-emptivetreatment comprises administering a corticosteroid and an inflammatorycytokine antagonist, such as dexamethasone with tocilizumab orsiltuximab, or prednisone with tocilizumab or siltuximab.

In any of the aforementioned embodiments, a pre-emptive treatment maycomprise an angiopoietin-1 (Ang1) agonist, a Tie2 agonist or both.Exemplary Ang1 and Tie2 agonists are provided in, for example, Cho etal., Proc. Nat'l. Acad. Sci. USA 101:5547, 2004 (COMP-Ang1), Alfieri etal., Crit. Care 16:R182, 2012 (MAT-Ang1), Huang et al., Int. J. Oncol.34:79, 2009 (Bow-Ang1), and Kim et al., Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1793:772,2009 (COMP-Ang2). The Ang1 and Tie2 agonists of these publications areincorporated herein by reference in their entirety. In certainembodiments, an angiopoietin-1 agonist comprises hypertransfusion ofplatelets (e.g., to increase the amount of angiopoietin-1), COMP-Ang1,MAT-Ang1, Bow-Ang1, or a combination thereof. In other embodiments, aTie2 agonist comprises COMP-Ang2. Furthermore, any one of theangiopoietin-1 agonists may be combined with the Tie2 agonist. Incertain embodiments, an inflammatory cytokine antagonist treatmentcomprises plasma exchange (e.g., to reduce the amount of inflammatorycytokines).

In certain embodiments, provided herein are methods of monitoringprogression of an adverse event in a subject, comprising measuring thelevel of a biomarker of endothelial activation in a biological samplefrom a mammalian subject having a hematologic malignancy and prior tocellular immunotherapy, wherein the biomarker of endothelial activationis selected from angiopoietin-2, angiopoietin-1, VCAM-1, von Willebrandfactor antigen (vWF Ag), asymmetric dimethyl arginine (ADMA), IL-8,CCL26, endothelin-1, osteoprotegerin, CD142 tissue factor, C-reactiveprotein, E-selectin, P-selectin, P-selectin cofactor CD63/LAMP3, PAI-1,α-fucosyltransferase VI, circulating endothelial cells, endothelialmicroparticles, or any combination thereof, and monitoring the subjectfor a risk of developing an adverse event associated with cellularimmunotherapy when the biomarker of endothelial activation is increasedas compared to a normal sample.

In any of the aforementioned embodiments, provided herein are methodsfor reducing the risk of an adverse event associated with cellularimmunotherapy or methods of monitoring progression of an adverse eventin a subject, wherein the subject has a hematologic malignancy isselected from Hodgkin's lymphoma, non-Hodgkins lymphoma (NHL), primarycentral nervous system lymphomas, T cell lymphomas, small lymphocyticlymphoma (SLL), B-cell prolymphocytic leukemia, lymphoplasmacyticlymphoma, splenic marginal zone lymphoma, plasma cell myeloma, solitaryplasmacytoma of bone, extraosseous plasmacytoma, extra-nodal marginalzone B-cell lymphoma (mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue (MALT)lymphoma), nodal marginal zone B-cell lymphoma, follicular lymphoma,mantle cell lymphoma, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), mediastinal(thymic) large B-cell lymphoma, intravascular large B-cell lymphoma,primary effusion lymphoma, acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), acutemyeloid leukemia (AML), chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), chronicmyoblastic leukemia (CML), Hairy cell leukemia (HCL), chronicmyelomonocytic leukemia (CMML), juvenile myelomonocytic leukemia (JMML),large granular lymphocytic leukemia (LGL), blastic plasmacytoiddendritic cell neoplasm (BPDCN), Burkitt lymphoma/leukemia, multiplemyeloma, Bence-Jones myeloma, non-secretory myeloma, plasmacytoma,amyloidosis, monoclonal gammopathy of unknown dignificance (MGUS), orWaldenstrom's macroglobulinemia.

In any of the aforementioned embodiments, provided herein are methodsfor reducing the risk of an adverse event associated with cellularimmunotherapy or methods of monitoring progression of an adverse eventin a subject, wherein the adverse event is cytokine release syndrome(CRS), neurotoxicity, or both.

Methods of Identifying Subjects at Risk of Adverse Events afterImmunotherapy

In certain aspects, the present disclosure provides methods fordiagnosing or detecting the risk of an adverse event associated withcellular immunotherapy, which methods involve (i) measuring the level ofan adverse event biomarker of endothelial activation in a biologicalsample from a mammalian subject having a hematologic malignancy withinabout 12 hours to about 48 hours after cellular immunotherapy, whereinthe adverse event biomarker measured comprises the subject's temperatureand a cytokine selected from IL-6, CCL2, IFN-γ, IL-10, IL-15, IL-2, orany combination thereof provided that at least IL-6, CCL2 or bothcytokine levels are measured; and (ii) identifying the subject as atrisk of developing an adverse event of cytokine release syndrome (CRS),neurotoxicity, or both after cellular immunotherapy when the subject'stemperature is at least 38° C. and the level of IL-6 is increased atleast 2- to 5-fold and/or the level of CCL2 is increased at least 5- to20-fold as compared to a normal sample, wherein the at risk subjectreceives pre-emptive treatment for the adverse event, receives analtered cellular immunotherapy regimen, or both.

In certain embodiments, the present disclosure provides methods fordiagnosing or detecting the risk of an adverse event associated withcellular immunotherapy wherein the biological sample is obtained afterpre-conditioning, after cellular immunotherapy administration, or afterboth. In some embodiments, a subject having a hematologic malignancy isconditioned before treatment with an adoptive cellular immunotherapy(e.g., CAR-T cell therapy). The conditioning regimen may bemyeloablative or non-myeloablative as described herein. In certainembodiments, conditioning for subjects with a hematologic malignancy(e.g., lymphoma, leukemia, myeloma) comprises administration daily fortwo to five days of cyclophosphamide (CY) at 30-60 mg/kg alone or CY at30-60 mg/kg and fludarabine (Flu) at 25-30 mg/m².

In certain embodiments, a biological sample of the aforementionedmethods is obtained from the subject within 12 hours, 24 hours, 36hours, or 48 hours after cellular immunotherapy, preferably within 36hours. In further embodiments, a classification tree model is used todiagnose or detect the risk of an adverse event associated with cellularimmunotherapy. An exemplary classification tree model is described inExample 9 and illustrated in FIG. 7 . In some embodiments, measuredadverse event biomarker comprises the subject's temperature of at leastabout 38.5° C., at least about 39° C. or more, the level of IL-6 is atleast 12 pg/mL to at least 16 pg/mL, and the level of CCL2 is at least1,300 pg/mL to at least 1,350 pg/mL.

In further embodiments, the present disclosure provides methods fordiagnosing or detecting the risk of an adverse event associated withcellular immunotherapy that further comprises measuring the level of abiomarker of endothelial activation. Exemplary biomarkers of endothelialactivation for use this method can be selected from angiopoietin-2,angiopoietin-1, VCAM-1, von Willebrand factor antigen (vWF Ag),asymmetric dimethyl arginine (ADMA), IL-8, CCL26, endothelin-1,osteoprotegerin, CD142 tissue factor, C-reactive protein, E-selectin,P-selectin, P-selectin cofactor CD63/LAMP3, PAI-1, α-fucosyltransferaseVI, circulating endothelial cells, endothelial microparticles, or anycombination thereof. In particular, embodiments, the biomarker ofendothelial activation comprises a component of endothelialWeibel-Palade bodies selected from angiopoietin-2, vWF Ag, IL-8, CCL26,endothelin-1, osteoprotegerin, CD142 tissue factor, P-selectin,P-selectin cofactor CD63/LAMP3, PAI-1, α-fucosyltransferase VI, or anycombination thereof.

In certain embodiments, biomarkers of endothelial activation include oneor more components from endothelial Weibel-Palade bodies, such asangiopoietin-2, vWF Ag, IL-8, CCL26, endothelin-1, osteoprotegerin,CD142 tissue factor, P-selectin, P-selectin cofactor CD63/LAMP3, PAI-1,α-fucosyltransferase VI, or any combination thereof. In particularembodiments, the biomarker of endothelial activation measured comprisesvWF Ag, angiopoietin-2, angiopoietin-1, VCAM-1, or a combinationthereof.

In still further embodiments, the present disclosure provides methodsfor diagnosing or detecting the risk of an adverse event associated withcellular immunotherapy by measuring the level of at least one biomarkerand at least one co-factor to the biomarker, and determining a ratiobetween the at least two markers. For example, an exemplary method ofthis disclosure comprises measuring the level of vWF Ag and measuringthe activity co-factor ADAMTS13, wherein a ratio of ADAMTS13 to vWF Agthat is reduced as compared to a normal sample identifies the subject asat risk of developing an adverse event associated with cellularimmunotherapy. In other embodiments, the method comprises measuring thelevel of angiopoietin-2, and the co-factor measured comprises measuringangiopoietin-1 level, wherein a ratio of angiopoietin-2 toangiopoietin-1 that is increased as compared to a normal sampleidentifies the subject as at risk of developing an adverse eventassociated with cellular immunotherapy. In even more embodiments, themethod comprises measuring the level of VCAM-1, and the co-factormeasured comprises measuring angiopoietin-1 level, wherein a ratio ofVCAM-1 to angiopoietin-1 that is increased as compared to a normalsample identifies the subject as at risk of developing an adverse eventassociated with cellular immunotherapy.

Any of the aforementioned pre-emptive treatments for the adverse eventor altered cellular immunotherapy regimens comprises administering thecellular immunotherapy at a reduced dose, a corticosteroid, aninflammatory cytokine antagonist, an endothelial cell stabilizing agent,or any combination thereof, apply to this method as well.

In any of the aforementioned embodiments, provided herein are methodsfor diagnosing or detecting the risk of an adverse event associated withcellular immunotherapy, wherein the subject has a hematologic malignancyis selected from Hodgkin's lymphoma, non-Hodgkins lymphoma (NHL),primary central nervous system lymphomas, T cell lymphomas, smalllymphocytic lymphoma (SLL), B-cell prolymphocytic leukemia,lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma, splenic marginal zone lymphoma, plasma cellmyeloma, solitary plasmacytoma of bone, extraosseous plasmacytoma,extra-nodal marginal zone B-cell lymphoma (mucosa-associated lymphoidtissue (MALT) lymphoma), nodal marginal zone B-cell lymphoma, follicularlymphoma, mantle cell lymphoma, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL),mediastinal (thymic) large B-cell lymphoma, intravascular large B-celllymphoma, primary effusion lymphoma, acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL),acute myeloid leukemia (AML), chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL),chronic myoblastic leukemia (CML), Hairy cell leukemia (HCL), chronicmyelomonocytic leukemia (CMML), juvenile myelomonocytic leukemia (JMML),large granular lymphocytic leukemia (LGL), blastic plasmacytoiddendritic cell neoplasm (BPDCN), Burkitt lymphoma/leukemia, multiplemyeloma, Bence-Jones myeloma, non-secretory myeloma, plasmacytoma,amyloidosis, monoclonal gammopathy of unknown dignificance (MGUS), orWaldenstrom's macroglobulinemia.

In any of the aforementioned embodiments, provided herein are methodsfor diagnosing or detecting the risk of an adverse event associated withcellular immunotherapy, wherein the adverse event is cytokine releasesyndrome (CRS), neurotoxicity, or both.

Methods of Treating Subjects at Risk of Adverse Events

In further aspects, the present disclosure provides methods for treatinghematologic malignancy in a mammalian subject, the method comprisingadministering to the subject a pre-emptive treatment, an alteredcellular immunotherapy regimen, or both to minimize the risk for apotential adverse event, wherein the subject was identified forpre-emptive treatment by any of the methods described herein todetermine the risk of an adverse event associated with cellularimmunotherapy in the subject having a hematologic malignancy. In someembodiments, the present disclosure provides methods for treating ahematologic malignancy in a mammalian subject, the method comprising (a)obtaining a result from any of the methods described herein to determinethe risk of an adverse event associated with cellular immunotherapy inthe subject; and (b) administering to the subject a pre-emptivetreatment, an altered cellular immunotherapy regimen, or both tominimize the risk for the potential adverse event. In certainembodiments, the hematologic malignancy that is treated is relapsed,refractory, indolent, or a combination thereof.

In certain embodiments, provided herein are methods for treating ahematologic malignancy in a mammalian subject, wherein the subject has ahematologic malignancy is selected from Hodgkin's lymphoma, non-Hodgkinslymphoma (NHL), primary central nervous system lymphomas, T celllymphomas, small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL), B-cell prolymphocyticleukemia, lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma, splenic marginal zone lymphoma,plasma cell myeloma, solitary plasmacytoma of bone, extraosseousplasmacytoma, extra-nodal marginal zone B-cell lymphoma(mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue (MALT) lymphoma), nodal marginal zoneB-cell lymphoma, follicular lymphoma, mantle cell lymphoma, diffuselarge B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), mediastinal (thymic) large B-celllymphoma, intravascular large B-cell lymphoma, primary effusionlymphoma, acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), acute myeloid leukemia(AML), chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), chronic myoblastic leukemia(CML), Hairy cell leukemia (HCL), chronic myelomonocytic leukemia(CMML), juvenile myelomonocytic leukemia (JMML), large granularlymphocytic leukemia (LGL), blastic plasmacytoid dendritic cell neoplasm(BPDCN), Burkitt lymphoma/leukemia, multiple myeloma, Bence-Jonesmyeloma, non-secretory myeloma, plasmacytoma, amyloidosis, monoclonalgammopathy of unknown dignificance (MGUS), or Waldenstrom'smacroglobulinemia.

Therapeutic regimens disclosed herein can comprise a cellularimmunotherapy in combination with one or more additional combination oradjunctive therapies. Exemplary additional or adjunctivechemotherapeutic agents include alkylating agents (e.g., cisplatin,oxaliplatin, carboplatin, busulfan, nitrosoureas, nitrogen mustards suchas bendamustine, uramustine, temozolomide), antimetabolites (e.g.,aminopterin, methotrexate, mercaptopurine, fluorouracil, cytarabine,gemcitabine), taxanes (e.g., paclitaxel, nab-paclitaxel, docetaxel),anthracyclines (e.g., doxorubicin, daunorubicin, epirubicin, idaruicin,mitoxantrone, valrubicin), bleomycin, mytomycin, actinomycin,hydroxyurea, topoisomerase inhibitors (e.g., camptothecin, topotecan,irinotecan, etoposide, teniposide), monoclonal antibodies (e.g.,ipilimumab, pembrolizumab, nivolumab, avelumab, alemtuzumab,bevacizumab, cetuximab, gemtuzumab, panitumumab, rituximab, tositumomab,trastuzumab), vinca alkaloids (e.g., vincristine, vinblastine,vindesine, vinorelbine), cyclophosphamide, prednisone, leucovorin,oxaliplatin, hyalurodinases, or any combination thereof.

Cytokines and growth factors are further therapeutic agents contemplatedby this disclosure and include one or more of TNF, IL-1, IL-2, IL-3,IL-4, IL-5, IL-6, IL-7, IL-8, IL-9, IL-10, IL-11, IL-12, IL-13, IL-14,IL-15, IL-16, IL-17, IL-18, IFN, G-CSF, Meg-CSF, GM-CSF, thrombopoietin,stem cell factor, and erythropoietin. Pharmaceutical compositions orcombinations in accordance with the disclosure may also include otherknown angiopoietins, for example Ang-1, Ang-2, Ang-4, Ang-Y, or thehuman angiopoietin-like polypeptide, or vascular endothelial growthfactor (VEGF). Growth factors for use in pharmaceutical compositions ofthis disclosure include angiogenin, bone morphogenic protein-1, bonemorphogenic protein-2, bone morphogenic protein-3, bone morphogenicprotein-4, bone morphogenic protein-5, bone morphogenic protein-6, bonemorphogenic protein-7, bone morphogenic protein-8, bone morphogenicprotein-9, bone morphogenic protein-10, bone morphogenic protein-11,bone morphogenic protein-12, bone morphogenic protein-13, bonemorphogenic protein-14, bone morphogenic protein-15, bone morphogenicprotein receptor IA, bone morphogenic protein receptor IB, brain derivedneurotrophic factor, ciliary neutrophic factor, ciliary neutrophicfactor receptor α, cytokine-induced neutrophil chemotactic factor 1,cytokine-induced neutrophil chemotactic factor 2a, cytokine-inducedneutrophil chemotactic factor 2β, β endothelial cell growth factor,endothelin 1, epidermal growth factor, epithelial-derived neutrophilattractant, fibroblast growth factor (FGF) 4, FGF 5, FGF 6, FGF 7, FGF8, FGF 8b, FGF 8c, FGF 9, FGF 10, FGF acidic, FGF basic, glial cellline-derived neutrophic factor receptor α1, glial cell line-derivedneutrophic factor receptor α2, growth related protein, growth relatedprotein α, growth related protein β, growth related protein γ, heparinbinding epidermal growth factor, hepatocyte growth factor, hepatocytegrowth factor receptor, insulin-like growth factor I, insulin-likegrowth factor receptor, insulin-like growth factor II, insulin-likegrowth factor binding protein, keratinocyte growth factor, leukemiainhibitory factor, leukemia inhibitory factor receptor α, nerve growthfactor, nerve growth factor receptor, neurotrophin-3, neurotrophin-4,placenta growth factor, placenta growth factor 2, platelet derivedendothelial cell growth factor, platelet derived growth factor, plateletderived growth factor A chain, platelet derived growth factor AA,platelet derived growth factor AB, platelet derived growth factor Bchain, platelet derived growth factor BB, platelet derived growth factorreceptor α, platelet derived growth factor receptor β, pre-B cell growthstimulating factor, stem cell factor, stem cell factor receptor,transforming growth factor α, transforming growth factor β, transforminggrowth factor β1, transforming growth factor β1.2, transforming growthfactor β2, transforming growth factor β3, transforming growth factor β5,latent transforming growth factor β1, transforming growth factor βbinding protein I, transforming growth factor β binding protein II,transforming growth factor β binding protein III, tumor necrosis factorreceptor type I, tumor necrosis factor receptor type II, urokinase-typeplasminogen activator receptor, vascular endothelial growth factor, andchimeric proteins and biologically or immunologically active fragmentsthereof.

In certain embodiments, a combination or adjunctive therapy further oralternatively comprises one or more of chemotherapy, a biologic therapy,a hormonal therapy, or any combination thereof.

In certain embodiments, a biologic therapy includes an antibody, anscFv, a nanobody, a fusion protein (e.g., chimeric antigen receptor(CAR), such as used in adoptive immunotherapy comprising a T cellexpressing an antigen specific CAR on its cell surface), a tyrosinekinase inhibitor, an immunoreactive T cell, an immunoreactive NaturalKiller cell (NKC), or any combination thereof. In certain furtherembodiments, an antibody comprises ipilimumab, pembrolizumab, nivolumab,avelumab, cetuximab, trastuzumab, bevacizumab, alemtuzumab, gemtuzumab,panitumumab, rituximab, tositumomab, or any combination thereof.

To practice coordinate administration of therapies of this disclosure,therapy regimens combine cellular immunotherapy (e.g., CAR-modified Tcell) with an additional or adjunctive therapy simultaneously orsequentially in a coordinated treatment protocol. For example, a therapyregimen may combine a conditioning procedure with a cellularimmunotherapy and an optional combination therapy comprisingchemotherapy, radiation therapy or the like. In this example, anoptional combination therapy may comprise one or more chemotherapeuticagents to be administered concurrently or sequentially, in a given orderor otherwise with a conditioning regimen, a cellular immunotherapy, orboth.

A coordinate administration of one or more therapies or agents may bedone in any order, and there may be a time period while only one or both(or all) therapies, individually or collectively, exert their biologicalactivities. A distinguishing aspect of all such coordinate treatmentmethods is that a treatment regimen elicits some favorable clinicalresponse, which may or may not be in conjunction with a secondaryclinical response provided by an additional therapeutic agent orprocess. For example, the coordinate administration of a cellularimmunotherapy with a combination therapy as contemplated herein canyield an enhanced (e.g., synergistic) therapeutic response beyond thetherapeutic response elicited by any of the therapies alone.

For the purposes of administration, the compounds of the presentdisclosure may be administered as a raw chemical or may be formulated aspharmaceutical compositions. Pharmaceutical compositions of the presentdisclosure may comprise a small molecule, chemical entity, nucleic acidmolecule, peptide or polypeptide (e.g., antibody), and apharmaceutically acceptable carrier, diluent or excipient. The smallmolecule, chemical entity, nucleic acid molecule, peptide or polypeptidecomposition will be in an amount that is effective to treat a particulardisease or condition of interest—that is, in an amount sufficient forreducing the risk of or treating a hyperproliferative disease, such ashematologic malignancies or any of the other associated indicationsdescribed herein, and preferably with acceptable toxicity to a patient.Compounds for use in the methods described herein can be determined byone skilled in the art, for example, as described in the Examples below.Appropriate concentrations and dosages can be readily determined by oneskilled in the art.

Administration of the cells and compounds, or their pharmaceuticallyacceptable salts, in pure form or in an appropriate pharmaceuticalcomposition, of this disclosure can be carried out using any mode ofadministration for agents serving similar utilities. The pharmaceuticalcompositions of this disclosure can be prepared by combining a cell orcompound of this disclosure with an appropriate pharmaceuticallyacceptable carrier, diluent or excipient, and compounds may beformulated into preparations in solid, semi-solid, liquid or gaseousforms, such as tablets, capsules, powders, granules, ointments,solutions, suppositories, injections, inhalants, gels, microspheres, andaerosols. Exemplary routes of administering such pharmaceuticalcompositions include oral, topical, transdermal, inhalation, parenteral,sublingual, buccal, rectal, vaginal, and intranasal.

The term “parenteral” as used herein includes subcutaneous injections,intravenous, intramuscular, intrasternal injection or infusiontechniques. Pharmaceutical compositions of this disclosure areformulated to allow the active ingredients contained therein to bebioavailable upon administration of the composition to a patient.Compositions that will be administered to a subject or patient take theform of one or more dosage units, where for example, a tablet may be asingle dosage unit, and a container of a compound of this disclosure inaerosol form may hold a plurality of dosage units. Actual methods ofpreparing such dosage forms are known, or will be apparent, to thoseskilled in this art (see, e.g., Remington: The Science and Practice ofPharmacy, 22^(nd) Edition (Pharmaceutical Press, 2012). The compositionto be administered will, in any event, contain a therapeuticallyeffective amount of a compound of this disclosure, or a pharmaceuticallyacceptable salt thereof, for reducing the risk of or treating pancreaticcancer, metastases arising from the pancreatic cancer, a pancreaticcancer precursor lesion, a metastatic niche associated with pancreaticcancer or other condition of interest in accordance with the teachingsof this disclosure.

As a solid composition for oral administration, the pharmaceuticalcomposition may be formulated into a powder, granule, compressed tablet,pill, capsule, chewing gum, wafer or the like form. Exemplary solidcompositions can contain one or more inert diluents or edible carriers.In addition, one or more additives may be present, including binderssuch as carboxymethylcellulose, ethyl cellulose, microcrystallinecellulose, gum tragacanth or gelatin; excipients such as starch, lactoseor dextrins, disintegrating agents such as alginic acid, sodiumalginate, Primogel, corn starch and the like; lubricants such asmagnesium stearate or Sterotex; glidants such as colloidal silicondioxide; sweetening agents such as sucrose or saccharin; a flavoringagent such as peppermint, methyl salicylate or orange flavoring; or acoloring agent. When a pharmaceutical composition is in the form of acapsule, such as a gelatin capsule, it may contain, in addition tomaterials of the above type, a liquid carrier such as polyethyleneglycol or oil or combinations thereof.

The pharmaceutical composition may be in the form of a liquid, such asan elixir, syrup, solution, emulsion, or suspension. In certainembodiments, a liquid composition may be formulated for oraladministration or for delivery by injection, as two examples. Whenintended for oral administration, exemplary compositions may furthercontain, in addition to one or more compounds of this disclosure, asweetening agent, preservative, dye/colorant, flavor enhancer, or anycombination thereof. Exemplary compositions intended for administrationby injection may further contain a surfactant, preservative, wettingagent, dispersing agent, suspending agent, buffer, stabilizer, isotonicagent, or any combination thereof.

Liquid pharmaceutical compositions of this disclosure, whether they aresolutions, suspensions or other like forms, may further compriseadjuvants, including sterile diluents such as water for injection,saline solution, preferably physiological saline, Ringer's solution,isotonic sodium chloride, fixed oils such as synthetic mono ordiglycerides which may serve as the solvent or suspending medium,polyethylene glycols, glycerin, propylene glycol or other solvents;antibacterial agents such as benzyl alcohol or methyl paraben;antioxidants such as ascorbic acid or sodium bisulfite; chelating agentssuch as ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA); buffers such asacetates, citrates or phosphates and agents for the adjustment oftonicity such as sodium chloride or dextrose. The parenteral preparationcan be enclosed in ampoules, disposable syringes or multiple dose vialsmade of glass or plastic. Physiological saline is a preferred adjuvant.An injectable pharmaceutical composition is preferably sterile.

A pharmaceutical composition of this disclosure may be intended fortopical administration, in which case the carrier may comprise asuitable solution, emulsion, ointment, gel base, or any combinationthereof. The base, for example, may comprise petrolatum, lanolin,polyethylene glycols, bee wax, mineral oil, diluents such as water andalcohol, emulsifiers, stabilizers, or any combination thereof.Thickening agents may be present in a pharmaceutical composition of thisdisclosure for topical administration. If intended for transdermaladministration, the composition may include a transdermal patch oriontophoresis device.

A pharmaceutical composition of this disclosure may be intended forrectal administration, in the form, for example, of a suppository, whichwill melt in the rectum and release the active compound(s). Acomposition for rectal administration may contain an oleaginous base asa suitable nonirritating excipient. Exemplary bases include lanolin,cocoa butter, polyethylene glycol, or any combination thereof.

A pharmaceutical composition of this disclosure may include variousmaterials that modify the physical form of a solid or liquid dosageunit. For example, a composition may include materials that form acoating shell around the active ingredient(s). Exemplary materials forforming a coating shell may be inert, such as sugar, shellac, or otherenteric coating agents. Alternatively, active ingredient(s) may beencased in a gelatin capsule.

In certain embodiments, compounds and compositions of this disclosuremay be in the form of a solid or liquid. Exemplary solid or liquidformulations include semi-solid, semi-liquid, suspension, and gel forms.A pharmaceutical composition of this disclosure in solid or liquid formmay further include an agent that binds to the compound of thisdisclosure and thereby assists in the delivery of the compound. Suitableagents that may act in this capacity include a monoclonal or polyclonalantibody, a protein, or a liposome.

A pharmaceutical composition of this disclosure may consist of dosageunits that can be administered as an aerosol. The term aerosol is usedto denote a variety of systems ranging from those of colloidal nature tosystems consisting of pressurized packages. Delivery may be by aliquefied or compressed gas or by a suitable pump system that dispensesthe active ingredients. Aerosols of compounds of this disclosure may bedelivered in single phase, bi-phasic, or tri-phasic systems in order todeliver the active ingredient(s). Delivery of the aerosol includes thenecessary container, activators, valves, subcontainers, and the like,which together may form a kit.

Pharmaceutical compositions of this disclosure may be prepared bymethodology well known in the pharmaceutical art. For example, apharmaceutical composition intended to be administered by injection canbe prepared by combining a compound of this disclosure with sterile,distilled water to form a solution. A surfactant may be added tofacilitate the formation of a homogeneous solution or suspension.Surfactants are compounds that non-covalently interact with the compoundof this disclosure to facilitate dissolution or homogeneous suspensionof a compound in an aqueous delivery system.

Cells and compounds, or their pharmaceutically acceptable salts, of thisdisclosure are administered in a therapeutically effective amount, whichwill vary depending upon a variety of factors including the activity ofthe specific compound employed; the metabolic stability and length ofaction of the compound; the age, body weight, general health, sex, anddiet of the patient; the mode and time of administration; the rate ofexcretion; the drug combination; the severity of the particular disorderor condition; and the subject undergoing therapy. Followingadministration of therapies according to the formulations and methods ofthis disclosure, test subjects will exhibit about a 10% up to about a99% reduction in one or more symptoms associated with the disease ordisorder being treated (e.g., pancreas cancer), as compared toplacebo-treated or other suitable control subjects.

Cells and compounds, or pharmaceutically acceptable derivatives thereof,of this disclosure may also be administered simultaneously with, priorto, or after administration of one or more other therapeutic agents.Such combination therapy includes administration of a singlepharmaceutical dosage formulation which contains a compound of thisdisclosure and one or more additional active agents, as well asadministration of the compound of this disclosure and each active agentin its own separate pharmaceutical dosage formulation. For example, acellular immunotherapy of this disclosure and another active agent canbe administered to the patient together in a single dosage composition,or each agent administered in separate dosage formulations. Whereseparate dosage formulations are used, the cells and compounds of thisdisclosure and one or more additional active agents can be administeredat essentially the same time, i.e., concurrently, or at separatelystaggered times, i.e., sequentially; combination therapy is understoodto include all these regimens.

In any of the aforementioned embodiments, a biological sample comprisesa blood or serum sample.

In any of the aforementioned embodiments, a mammalian subject is ahuman.

Kits

In another aspect, the present invention provides kits comprisingmaterials useful for carrying out diagnostic methods according to thepresent disclosure. The diagnosis procedures described herein may beperformed by diagnostic laboratories, experimental laboratories, orpractitioners. The invention provides kits, which can be used in thesedifferent settings. Materials and reagents for characterizing biologicalsamples and diagnosing the risk of an adverse event in ahyperproliferative disease in a subject treated by immunotherapyaccording to the methods herein may be assembled together in a kit. Incertain aspects, a kit comprises at least one reagent that specificallydetects levels of one or more biomarkers disclosed herein, andinstructions for using the kit according to a method of this disclosure.

Each kit may preferably include the reagent (e.g., primary antibodyspecific for a biomarker, labeled anti-human immunoglobulin) thatrenders the procedure specific. Thus, for detecting/quantifying abiomarker, the reagent that specifically detects levels of the biomarkermay be an antibody that specifically binds to the antigen of interest. Akit of the present disclosure may further comprise one or moresubstrates to anchor the antigen binding molecules, including microarrayslides, beads, plastic tubes, or other surfaces, one or more antibodiesto biomarker, labeling buffer or reagents, wash buffers or reagents,immunodetection buffer or reagents, and detection means. Protocols forusing these buffers and reagents for performing different steps of theprocedure may be included in the kit. The reagents may be supplied in asolid (e.g., lyophilized) or liquid form. The kits of the presentdisclosure may optionally comprise different containers (e.g., slide,vial, ampoule, test tube, flask or bottle) for each individual buffer orreagent. Each component will generally be suitable as aliquoted in itsrespective container or provided in a concentrated form. Othercontainers suitable for conducting certain steps of the disclosedmethods may also be provided. The individual containers of the kit arepreferably maintained in close confinement for commercial sale.

In certain embodiments, kits of the present disclosure further includecontrol samples, control slides, or both. Instructions for using thekit, according to one or more methods of this disclosure, may compriseinstructions for processing the biological sample obtained from asubject, or for performing the test, instructions for interpreting theresults. As well as a notice in the form prescribed by a governmentalagency (e.g., FDA) regulating the manufacture, use or sale ofpharmaceuticals or biological products.

In another aspect, kits are provided for diagnosing or detecting therisk of an adverse event associated with cellular immunotherapy in amammalian subject having a hematologic malignancy, comprising:

a binding reagent and detectable agent for measuring the level of aplurality of cytokines selected from IL-6, CCL2, IFN-γ, IL-10, IL-15,IL-2, or any combination thereof, provided that reagents for detectingat least IL-6, CCL2 or both are provided;

optionally a device for measuring the subject's temperature;

an optional binding reagent and detectable agent for measuring the levelor activity of a biomarker of endothelial activation selected fromangiopoietin-2, VCAM-1, vWF Ag, IL-8, CCL26, endothelin-1,osteoprotegerin, CD142 tissue factor, P-selectin, P-selectin cofactorCD63/LAMP3, PAI-1, α-fucosyltransferase VI, ADAMTS13, angiopoietin-1, orany combination thereof, provided that when the binding reagent forangiopoietin-2 or vWF Ag is present, the kit also contains a reagent fordetecting activity of ADAMTS13 or detecting angiopoietin-1,respectively; and

optional reagents for performing a binding reaction using the detectableagent,

optional instructions for using the binding reagent and the detectableagent;

wherein the subject is identified as at risk of developing an adverseevent associated with cellular immunotherapy when the biomarker ofendothelial activation is increased as compared to a normal sample; or

wherein the subject is identified as at risk of developing an adverseevent of cytokine release syndrome (CRS), neurotoxicity, or both aftercellular immunotherapy when the subject's temperature is at least 38° C.and the level of IL-6 is increased at least 2- to 5-fold and/or thelevel of CCL2 is increased at least 5- to 20-fold as compared to anormal sample.

In certain embodiments, the binding reagent comprises a nanobody or abinding fragment thereof, an antibody or a binding fragment thereof, ora T-cell receptor molecule or a binding fragment thereof.

In certain further embodiments, the binding reagent is conjugated to adetectable agent. In certain further embodiments, the binding agent isdetectable by one or more of: a colorimetric assay, fluorescenceimaging, an enzymatic assay, spectrophotometry, mass spectroscopy, orradiation imaging.

EXAMPLES Example 1 Experimental Procedures

Patient Characteristics, Lymphodepletion Chemotherapy and CAR-T cellInfusion

A single center study of neurologic adverse events (AEs) was conductedin 133 patients with relapsed and/or refractory CD19⁺ B-ALL, NHL and CLLwho received lymphodepletion chemotherapy and CD19-specific chimericantigen receptor (CAR)-modified T cells (CAR-T cell) in a phase ½ CAR-Tcell dose escalation/de-escalation clinical trial (Turtle et al. I,2016; Turtle et al. II, 2016). The study was conducted with approval ofthe Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center (FHCRC) institutional reviewboard, and is available at clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01865617.Informed consent was obtained from all patients.

CD19-specific CAR-modified T cells were manufactured as described inTurtle et al. I, 2016; and Turtle et al. II, 2016. In brief, patientsunderwent leukapheresis to obtain PBMC, from which CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ centralmemory T cell subsets were enriched. Enriched CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ centralmemory T cells were stimulated with anti-CD3/anti-CD28 coatedparamagnetic beads and transduced with a lentivirus encoding a CARcomprising a FMC63-derived CD19-specific scFv, a modified IgG4-hingespacer, a CD28 transmembrane domain, a 4-1BB costimulatory domain, and aCD3ζ signaling domain. A cell surface human EGFRt was also encoded inthe lentiviral vector separated from the CAR coding sequence cassette bya T2A ribosomal skip sequence to allow precise enumeration of transducedCD4⁺ and CD8⁺ CAR-T cells by flow cytometry. The modified T cells wereformulated in a 1:1 ratio of CD3⁺/CD4⁺/EGFRt⁺ T cells toCD3⁺/CD8⁺/EGFRt⁺ T cells for infusion at one of three dose levels (DL)as follows: DL1=2×10⁵ EGFRt cells/kg; DL2=2×10⁶ EGFRt⁺ cells/kg; andDL3=2×10⁷ EGFRt cells/kg. In patients with high circulating tumor burdenor severe lymphopenia, selection of bulk CD8⁺ T cells rather than CD8⁺central memory T cells could be performed. Patients receivedlymphodepletion chemotherapy with a cyclophosphamide-based regimen withor without fludarabine (Table 1), followed 2-4 days later by infusion ofthe CD19-specific CAR-modified T cells. Delay of CAR-T cell infusion waspermitted for patients with clinical conditions (e.g. active anduncontrolled infection) that precluded CAR-T cell infusion at thescheduled time. Examination for neurologic adverse events (AEs)presenting within 28 days after the first CAR-T cell infusion.

TABLE 1 Lymphodepletion Regimens prior to CAR-T Cell InfusionLymphodepletion Regimen Number of Patients Cyclophosphamide 2 g/m² Day1; 2 Etoposide 200 mg/m² Days 2-4 Cyclophosphamide 4 g/m² Day 1; 3Etoposide 200 mg/m² Days 2-4 Cyclophosphamide 3 g/m² Day 1; 2 Etoposide200 mg/m² Days 2-4 Cyclophosphamide 2 g/m² Day 1; 2 Etoposide 200 mg/m²Days 2-4 Cyclophosphamide 2 g/m² Day 1 14 Cyclophosphamide 3 g/m² Day 12 Cyclophosphamide 4 g/m² Day 1 1 Bendamustine 90mg/m² Day 1-2 1Fludarabine 25 mg/m² Day 1-3 2 Cyclophosphamide 30 mg/kg Day 1; 11Fludarabine 25 mg/m² Day 2-4 Cyclophosphamide 60 mg/kg Day 1; 78Fludarabine 25 mg/m² Day 2-4 Cyclophosphamide 1 g/m² Day 1; 1Fludarabine 25 mg/m² Day 2-4 Cyclophosphamide 60 mg/kg Day 1; 11Fludarabine 25 mg/m² Day 2-6 Cyclophosphamide 300 mg/m² and 1Fludarabine 30 mg/m² Day 1-3 Cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m² and 2Fludarabine 30 mg/m² Day 1-3 Total 133

Grading of CRS and Neurotoxicity

The severity of CRS was graded according to consensus criteria (Lee etal., Blood 124:188, 2014). Neurologic adverse events (AEs) were gradedaccording to the Common Terminology Criteria of Adverse Events (CTCAE)v4.0.3 and did not contribute to organ toxicity criteria for CRSgrading.

Assessment of Neurologic Adverse Events (AEs)

Data were collected by review of the study database and electronicmedical record (EMR). Neurologic AEs were prospectively assigned an AEterm and severity score according to the NCI Common Terminology Criteriafor Adverse Events (CTCAE; v4.03) for each day the neurologic AE waspresent. Due to the heterogeneous presentation of neurotoxicity, AEswere retrospectively grouped into term subsets (Table 2).

“Delirium” encompassed acute cognitive impairment manifesting asconfusion, agitation or difficulty with attention or short-term memory,and was distinguished by preserved alertness from “decreased level ofconsciousness.” Additional AE subsets included “ataxia,” “focalweakness,” “generalized weakness,” “hallucinations,” headache,” “ICH,”“language disturbance,” “oculomotor disorder,” “seizure,” “stroke,”“tremor,” “other abnormal movements,” and “visual changes.” NeurologicAEs not captured in the preceding list were designated “other”. Theoverall neurotoxicity grade assigned for a given patient was the highestgrade of all neurologic AEs identified in that patient.

Neuroimaging

Head computed tomography (CT) and brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)scans were performed when clinically appropriate using standard clinicalsequences. All available imaging was reviewed for this study andretrospectively classified as normal, acutely abnormal or chronicallyabnormal. Abnormalities presenting within 28 days after CAR-T cellinfusion were designated acute when findings were consistent with anacute event (edema, blood, enhancement, or diffusion restriction) andwere either new compared to prior imaging or evolved on follow-up.Abnormalities were designated chronic when there were non-specific whitematter changes that are typical sequelae of chemotherapy or age-relatedmicrovascular disease, when abnormalities were due to an unrelated priorprocess, and when findings were stable in baseline or follow-up scans.

Evaluation of Clinical Laboratory Parameters, CAR-T Cell Counts, andBiomarker Concentrations

Blood was collected before lymphodepletion, on day 0 before CAR-T cellinfusion, and at approximately 1, 3, 7, 10, 14, 21, and 28 days afterCAR-T cell infusion. Complete blood counts and laboratory analyses ofrenal and hepatic function, and coagulation were performed usingClinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA)-certified assays inclinical laboratories. The concentrations of cytokines in serum weredetermined by Luminex assay, according to the manufacturer'sinstructions, with the exception of angiopoietin (Ang)-1 and Ang-2concentrations, which were evaluated by an immunoassay-based method(Meso Scale Discovery, Rockville, Md.).⁵ The von Willebrand Factor (VWF)concentration in patient serum was measured by sandwich ELISA, asdescribed previously.⁶ CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ CAR-T cells were identified by flowcytometry as viable CD45⁺/CD3⁺/CD4⁺/CD8⁻/EGFRt⁺ andCD45⁺/CD3⁺/CD4⁻/CD8⁺/EGFRt⁺ events in a lymphocyte forward/side scatter(FS/SS) gate. The absolute CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ CAR-T cell counts in blood weredetermined by multiplying the percentage of CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ CAR-T cells,respectively, in a viable CD45⁺ lymphocyte FS/SS gate by the absolutelymphocyte count established by a complete blood count (CBC) performedon the same day (Turtle et al. I and II, 2016).

Cerebrospinal Fluid (CSF) and Blood Samples

CSF was collected from patients when appropriate for clinical care:before lymphodepletion (Pre), during the presence of acute neurotoxicity(Acute), or when patients had recovered from the acute toxicitiesassociated with CAR-T cell immunotherapy (Recovery, approximately 3weeks or more after CAR-T cell infusion). CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ CAR-modified Tcell counts in blood and CSF were evaluated by flow cytometry, aspreviously described (Turtle et al. I, 2016; and Turtle et al. II,2016). The absolute CAR-T cell count was determined by multiplying thepercentage of CAR-T cells identified by flow cytometry in a lymphocyteFS-SS gate by the absolute lymphocyte count established by automatedhemocytometer. Patients with progressive CNS malignancy detected by flowcytometry analysis of CSF were not included in the CSF analyses.Concentrations of all cytokines except Ang-1 and Ang-2 in serum and CSFwere evaluated by Luminex assay (Riverside, Calif.), as previouslydescribed (Turtle et al. I, 2016; and Turtle et al. II, 2016). SerumAng-1 and Ang-2 concentrations were evaluated using an immunoassay-basedmethod (Meso Scale Discovery, Rockville, Md.), according to themanufacturer's instructions.

vWF Ag and ADAMTS13 Assays

The vWF antigen (vWF Ag) concentration in patient sera was measured bysandwich ELISA, as previously described (Chung et al., Blood 127:637-45,2016), using polyclonal rabbit anti-human vWF as a capture antibody andhorseradish peroxidase (HRP)-conjugated polyclonal rabbit anti-human vWFas a detection antibody (Dako, Troy, Mich.).

The ADAMTS13 protease activity in patient sera was measured using anenzyme-linked assay to evaluate cleavage of a HRP-conjugated peptidefrom the vWF A2 domain, as previously described (Wu et al., J. Thromb.Haemost. 4:129, 2006).

Serum-Induced Activation of Endothelial Cells

Human vascular endothelial cells (HUVECs) (Lonza, Portsmouth, N.H.) werecultured for 7 days in parallel-plate flow chambers coated with rat tailtype I collagen. Serum, either from patients or healthy donors, wasincubated with HUVECs at 37° C. for 30 minutes under static conditions.The chambers were perfused with PBS to remove serum and then perfusedwith a suspension of fixed platelets (Dade Behring, Siemens MedicalSolutions, Deerfield, Ill.) to decorate vWF strings attached to thesurface of the HUVECs. The number and length of the vWF-platelet stringswere quantified as string units on 16 random non-overlapping brightfield images per chamber, as described in Chung et al., 2016. The valuesfor string units obtained from HUVECs incubated with serum werenormalized to those from HUVECs stimulated with phorbol myristateacetate (PMA), which was designated as 100%.

Cytokine Stimulation of Primary Human Brain Pericytes

Primary human brain vascular pericytes were cultured in Specialty Medium(ScienCell Research Laboratories, Carlsbad, Calif.) alone orsupplemented with 30 ng/mL IFN-γ (Peprotech, Rocky Hill, N.J.) after 24and 72 hours. After 96 hours, IL-6 and VEGF concentrations were analyzedin the culture supernatant by Luminex, and PDGFRβ expression (Biolegend,San Diego, Calif.) and cleaved caspase-3 (Cell Signaling, Danvers,Mass.) on pericytes was determined by flow cytometry.

Histology and Immunohistochemistry

Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) brain tissue blocks weresectioned at 4 μm and mounted on positively charged slides. Ahematopathologist, an anatomic transplant pathologist, and aneuropathologist examined hematoxylin and eosin stained slides ofavailable autopsy tissues. Histologic features were identified andgraded by consensus.

Immunohistochemistry was performed on brainstem sections of pons at thelevel of the locus coeruleus using a standard automated immunodetectionsystem with the following antibodies: anti-CD3 (Ventana, Tucson, Ariz.),anti-CD8 (Ventana), CD31 (Dako), CD61 (Ventana), CD68 (Dako), CD79a(Dako), and vWF Ag (Dako). Appropriate positive and negative controlswere included with each antibody run.

Statistical Methods of Neurotoxicity

Descriptive statistics are reported for key variables. Kruskal-Wallistest, Wilcoxon signed-rank test and Fisher's Exact test were used tocompare variables among categories of neurotoxicity. All p-valuesreported were two-sided without adjustments for multiple comparisons.Tests were generally performed at a significance level of 0.05. Forcomparisons at distinct time points in longitudinal analyses oflaboratory parameters, vital signs and cytokines, the significance levelwas set at 0.005, given the number of comparisons. The visit windows inthe kinetic plots were chosen based on the schedule of visits accordingto the clinical trial protocol. If multiple values existed in a visitwindow, the minimum or maximum value in the window was used.Furthermore, stepwise multivariable proportional odds models wereperformed to assess impact of baseline variables on occurrence ofneurotoxicity. Cumulative incidence curves were created for grade1-5 andfor grade3-5 neurological AEs. Statistical analyses were performed usingSAS (version 9.4; SAS Institute Inc.) and classification tree modelswere performed using JMP (version 13.0; SAS Institute Inc.).

Statistical Analysis of CRS

Descriptive statistics are reported for key variables. Fisher's exacttest, Kruskal-Wallis test, and Wilcoxon test were used to comparecategorical and continuous variables among grades of CRS. Stepwisemultivariable proportional odds models were performed to assess theimpact of baseline factors on the occurrence of CRS (grade0 vs 1-3 vs4-5). Logistic regression was used to evaluate the association betweenpeak CAR-T cell counts after infusion and the probability of CRS,neurotoxicity, and disease response. Data was censored at the time of asecond CAR-T cell infusion in 15 of 133 patients who received a secondCAR-T cell infusion without additional lymphodepletion chemotherapyapproximately 14 days after the first CAR-T cell infusion.

Statistical analyses of Key Variables

Descriptive statistics are reported for key variables. Cumulativeincidence curves for onset of the first fever (temperature≥38° C.), andthe first neurotoxicity event were constructed. Fisher's exact test,Kruskal-Wallis test, and Wilcoxon test was used to compare categoricaland continuous variables among categories of CRS. Stepwise multivariableproportional odds models were performed to assess impact of baselinefactors on the occurrence of CRS (grade0 vs 1-3 vs 4-5). Logisticregression was used to estimate the probability of the occurrence of CRSor neurotoxicity, and disease response with peak CAR-T cell countswithin the first 30 days. Log 10 values were used to transform data asappropriate, with 0.001 substituting for values of 0. Tests weregenerally performed at a significance level of 0.05. All p-valuesreported were two-sided without adjustments for multiple comparisons.

The mean±standard error of mean (SEM) of the observed values for eachlaboratory parameter were plotted over time. The time points in theplots were chosen based on the schedule of visits according to theclinical trial protocol. If multiple values existed in a visit window,the minimum or maximum value in the window was used. For comparisons atdistinct time points, the significance level was set at 0.005, given thenumber of comparisons.

Statistical analyses were performed using SAS (version 9.4; SASInstitute Inc.) and classification tree models were performed using JMP(version 13.0; SAS Institute Inc.).

Example 2 Neurologic Adverse Events (AEs) after Immunotherapy withCD19-Specific CAR-Modified T Cells

Neurologic adverse events (AEs) were studied in a cohort of 133 adultswho received lymphodepletion chemotherapy and CD19-specific CAR-T cellsto treat refractory B-ALL, NHL or CLL. Within 28 days of CD19-specificCAR-T cell infusion, 40% of patients (53/133) had one or more grade≥1neurologic AEs (40%; 19% grade1-2; 16% grade3; 2% grade4; 3% grade5),presenting a median of 4 days after CAR-T cell infusion (FIGS. 1A and1B). The median time from onset to the highest neurotoxicity grade was 1day (range 0-19) and the median duration of reversible neurologic AEswas 5 days (range 1-70 days). Forty-eight of 53 patients with anyneurologic AE (91%) also had cytokine release syndrome (CRS) (FIG. 1C).Five patients with neurologic AEs (13%) did not develop CRS; however,all neurologic AEs in patients without CRS were mild (grade1),subjective, and transient. CRS with fever (≥38° C.) preceded the onsetof neurotoxicity in all patients who developed grade≥3 neurotoxicity(n=28). In patients who also developed CRS, neurotoxicity presented amedian of 4.5 days (range 2-17) after the first fever. Fever occurredearlier after CAR-T cell infusion in patients who subsequently developedgrade≥3 neurotoxicity compared to those who developed grade1-2neurotoxicity (p=0.0007). However, the time from CAR-T cell infusion tothe onset of neurotoxicity (p=0.17) as well as the time to the maximumgrade of neurotoxicity (p=0.78) were similar (FIGS. 1D-1F). Together,these data show that early onset of CRS is associated with subsequentdevelopment of more severe neurotoxicity.

Among the 53 patients with neurotoxicity the most common finding wasdelirium with preserved alertness (35 of 53, 66%; Table 2), which wasgrade≤2 in 13 of 35 patients (37%), and present for a median of 4 days(range 1-24). Headache was observed in 29 of 53 patients (55%) and wasgrade≤2 in 26 of 29 patients (90%), persisting for a median of 3 days(range 1-12). Grade 1-2 headache was the only neurologic AE in 9patients. A decreased level of consciousness occurred in 13 of 53patients (25%), and in 6 cases was associated with coma requiringinvasive ventilatory support. In those who recovered, the medianduration of the decreased level of consciousness was 2 days (range 1-12days). Language disturbance was observed in 18 of 53 patients (34%) fora median of 4 days (range 1-9) and was accompanied in 15 of 18 patients(83%) by decreased level of consciousness and/or delirium, whichcomplicated the distinction between impaired attention and aphasia asthe etiology of language disturbance. Focal neurologic deficits, ataxia,and other abnormal movements were infrequent. Seizures occurred in 4 of53 patients (8%). Seizures in 2 patients with grade5 neurotoxicityoccurred in the absence of a prior seizure history. The other twopatients were among 6 in the study with an antecedent seizure history.Intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) was rare (1 of 53; 2%) and ischemic strokewas not observed.

TABLE 2 Neurologic Adverse Event Terms ^(a,b) 1 2 3 4 (Life CTCAE Grade(Mild) (Moderate) (Severe) Threatening) 5 Term N = N = N = N = (Death)TOTAL^(B) Delirium  9  4 20 2 — 35 (66%) Headache 13 13  3 — — 29 (55%)Language Disturbance  3  6  9 — — 18 (34%) Decreased Level of  2  2  3 6— 13 (25%) Consciousness Tremor  7  3  0 — — 10 (19%) Focal Weakness  2 2  1 1 —  6 (11%) Hallucinations  2  1  1 — —  4 (8%) Seizure —  2  2 0—  4 (8%) Other Abnormal  2  1  0 — —  3 (6%) Movements Visual Changes 1  2  0 — —  3 (6%) Ataxia  0  0  2 — —  2 (4%) Generalized Weakness  0 1  1 0 —  2 (4%) Cerebral Edema — — — 0 2  2 (4%) Oculomotor Disorder 1  0  0 — —  1 (2%) Intracranial  0  0  0 0 1  1 (2%) HemorrhageCortical Laminar  0  0  0 0 1  1 (2%) Necrosis^(c) ^(a) Dashes indicateabsence of a grade in the CTCAE. ^(b) Number and percentage with each AEterm among 53 patients with neurotoxicity. ^(c)Cortical laminar necrosisis not included in the CTCAE.

Among 133 patients treated with lymphodepletion chemotherapy andCD19-specific CAR-modified T cells (CAR-T cells), 7 (5%) developedgrade≥4 neurotoxicity, of whom 6 were treated with CAR-T cell doses thatwere subsequently determined to be above the maximum tolerated dose foreach disease and tumor burden (B-ALL with ≤5% marrow blasts, 2×10⁶ CAR-Tcells/kg; B-ALL with ≥5% marrow blasts, 2×10⁵ CAR-T cells/kg; NHL, 2×10⁶CAR-T cells/kg; and CLL, 2×10⁶ CAR-T cells/kg). Four of 133 patients(3%) died due to neurotoxicity: one died from multifocal brainstemhemorrhage and edema associated with DIC, 2 died due to acute cerebraledema, and one developed cortical laminar necrosis with a persistentminimally conscious state until death 4 months after CAR-T cellinfusion. With the exception of those with fatal neurotoxicity and onepatient in whom a grade1 neurologic AE resolved 2 months after CAR-Tcell infusion, neurotoxicity completely resolved in all patients by day28 after CAR-T cell infusion (FIG. 1B).

Of the 53 patients with neurotoxicity, 23 underwent brain MRI within 28days of CAR-T cell infusion. Acute abnormalities on MRI were evident in7 of 23 patients (30%), 4 of whom had fatal neurotoxicity, indicatingthat an abnormal MRI scan during acute neurotoxicity is associated witha high risk of a poor outcome. FLAIR/T2 changes indicative of vasogenicedema, leptomeningeal enhancement, and/or multifocal microhemorrhageswere present in a majority of patients with severe neurotoxicity andabnormal MM scans. Contrast enhancement, consistent with breakdown ofthe blood-brain barrier (BBB), was also seen in some FLAIR/T2 lesions(FIGS. 2A-2F). One patient developed extensive cortical diffusionrestriction indicative of cytotoxic edema (FIGS. 2G-2I), which appeareddistinct from vasogenic edema observed in other patients. None of theother patients had lesions that were diffusion restricting.Electroencephalography (EEG) was performed in 17 of 53 patients duringacute neurotoxicity. Diffuse slowing was present in 13 of 17 patients(76%). Focal slowing was noted in one patient (6%) with known epilepsy,and clinical and subclinical seizures were observed in one patient. EEGwas normal in 2 of 17 patients (12%).

Example 3 Treatment of Neurotoxicity after Infusion of CD19-SpecificCAR-Modified T Cells

Tocilizumab, an antagonistic IL-6R monoclonal antibody, effectivelyameliorates fever and hypotension in most patients with severe cytokinerelease syndrome (CRS) after CD19-specific CAR-T cell (CAR-T cell)therapy, and is frequently administered with or without corticosteroidsto patients with neurotoxicity (Turtle et al. I, 2016; Turtle et al. II,2016). Twenty of 53 patients with neurotoxicity (38%) receivedtocilizumab (4-8 mg/kg, intravenous (IV)) and dexamethasone (10 mg IV,twice a day (b.i.d.)), one (2%) received tocilizumab alone, and 6 (11%)received dexamethasone alone (FIG. 1E). Fourteen patients received asingle dose of tocilizumab, five received two doses, and two receivedthree doses. A median of two doses (range 1-31) of dexamethasone 10 mgIV b.i.d. were administered and one patient received methylprednisolone(1,000 mg IV×9). In 14 of 21 patients (67%), the peak grade ofneurotoxicity occurred after the first dose of tocilizumab, and in 8 ofthose patients neurotoxicity first presented after tocilizumab had beenadministered for CRS. In patients with reversible neurotoxicity, thetime from the first tocilizumab and/or dexamethasone dose to resolutionof neurotoxicity (median 4 days, range 1-64 days) was longer than thetime to resolution of fever (temperature<38° C. for at least 48 hours,median 0.4 days, range 0-3.8 days, p<0.0001).

These data indicate that established neurotoxicity is less responsivethan CRS to interventions that suppress IL-6 activity or CAR-T cellfunction.

Example 4 Baseline Characteristics Associated with Risk of Neurotoxicityafter Infusion of CD19-Specific CAR-Modified T Cells

Baseline characteristics of patients receiving CAR-T cell immunotherapywere analyzed to identify factors associated with an increased risk ofsubsequent neurotoxicity. In univariate analyses (Table 3),neurotoxicity was more frequent in younger patients (p=0.094), thosewith B-ALL (p=0.084), a high fraction of tumor (p=0.072) and CD19⁺ cells(p=0.062) in bone marrow, and a high CAR-modified T cell dose(p<0.0001). The presence of any pre-existing neurologic comorbidity wasalso associated with neurotoxicity (p=0.0059). Only the infused CAR-Tcell dose was associated with the occurrence of more severeneurotoxicity (grade≥3 versus grade1-2, p=0.014). The selection of CD8⁺T cell subset in CAR-T cell manufacturing, the patient's sex and race,the number of prior chemotherapy regimens, previous hematopoietic stemcell transplantation, and pretreatment performance score were notassociated with neurotoxicity in univariate analyses.

TABLE 3 Factors Associated with Neurotoxicity Neurotoxicity CTCAEGrade^(a) Multi- Grade 0 1-2 3-5 Total Univariate^(b) variable^(c)Overall, n (%) 80 (60) 25 (19) 28 (21) 133 (100) Age, n (%) <40 years 11(41) 10 (37)  6 (22)  27  0.094 40-60 years 42 (66)  8 (13) 14 (22) 64 >60 years 27 (64)  7 (17)  8 (19)  42 Sex, n (%) Male 59 (63) 17(18) 17 (18)  93  0.4 Female 21 (53)  8 (20) 11 (28)  40 ALL 22 (47) 11(23) 14 (30)  47  0.084 Diagnosis, n (%) CLL 16 (67)  2 (8)  6 (25)  24NHL 42 (68) 12 (19)  8 (13)  62 Race, n (%) White 62 (57) 21 (19) 26(24) 109  0.174 Asian  7 (88)  1 (13)  0  8 American  3 (60)  1 (20)  1(20)  5 Indian or Alaska Native Black or  3 (100)  0  0  3 AfricanAmerican Other  5 (64)  2 (25)  1 (13)  8 Prior Median  4 (1, 11)  4 (1,10)  4 (1, 11)  4 (1, 11)  0.5 Therapies (range) Transplant Auto 17 (68) 5 (20)  3 (12)  25  0.5 History, n (%) Allo 14 (50)  8 (29)  6 (21)  28Karnofsky 60-70  7 (50)  3 (21)  4 (29)  14  0.5 Score^(e), n (%) 80-9065 (61) 18 (17) 23 (22) 106 100  8 (62)  4 (31)  1 (8)  13 Pre-ExistingAny 26 (45) 16 (28) 16 (28)  58  0.00598 0.00238 Neurologic PN^(f) 14(47)  7 (23)  9 (30)  30  0.2 Comorbidities, CNS  6 (43)  5 (36)  3 (21) 14  0.2 n (%) involvement Headache  6 (43)  5 (36) 3 (21)  14  0.2disorder Other  5 (50)  2 (20)  3 (30)  10  0.7 ICH^(h)  4 (67)  1 (17) 1 (17)  6  1 Seizures  2 (33)  2 (33)  2 (33)  6  0.3 Cog  1 (25)  2(50)  1 (50)  4  0.1 impairment^(i) MTX CNS  1 (50)  1 (50)  0  2  0.4toxicity^(j) Marrow Median  0.6  0.4 25.8  1.3  0.072 0.0165 Disease, %(range) (0, 97) (0, 93) (0, 97) (0, 97) Total CD19+ Median  5.3 12.429.1  8.8  0.062 T Cells In (range) (0, 99) (0, 93)5 (0, 97) (0, 99)Marrow, % CD8+ Selected 48 (67) 11 (15) 13 (18)  72 (54)  0.242 CentralMemory Enriched Car-T Cells^(k), n (%) Lymphodepletion Cy/Flu 58 (56) 23(22) 23 (22) 104  0.11 0.0259 Regimen^(l), n (%) Non-Cy/Flu 22 (76)  2(7)  5 (17)  29 CAR-T Cell 2 × 10⁵ 20 (57) 10 (29)  5 (14)  35 <00010.0009 Dose, n (%) cells/kg 2 × 10⁶ 55 (64) 15 (17) 16 (19)  86 cells/kg2 × 10⁷  5 (42)  0  7 (58)  12 cells/kg Cytokine Release None (G 0) 35(88)  5 (13)  0  40 <0.0001 n/a Syndrome, n (%) Mild (G 1-2) 44 (57) 19(25) 14 (18)  77 Severe (G 3-5)  1 (6)  1 (6) 14 (88)  16^(a)Percentages are shown in parentheses. ^(b)Two-sided p-valuescalculated based on Kruskal-Wallis test for continuous variables, andbased on Fisher's Exact test for categorical variables. ^(c)Stepwisemultivariable proportional odds models were performed to assess theimpact of baseline factors on the occurrence of neurotoxicity (grade 0vs 1-2 vs 3-5), where log₁₀ values were used to transform data asappropriate, with 0.001 substituting for marrow disease values of 0. CRSwas not included in the stepwise multivariable model, because it is nota pre-treatment variable; the percentage of all CD19⁺ cells in bonemarrow was not included in the stepwise multivariable model since itstrongly correlates with the percentage of marrow CD19⁺ abnormal B cells(r = 0.99, p <0.0001). Only variables with a p-value <0.05 were retainedin the final model. ^(d)White versus non-white ^(e)Karnofsky performancescore prior to lymphodepletion ^(f)Peripheral neuropathy ^(g)None versusany hIntracranial hemorrhage ^(i)Cognitive impairment ^(j)CNS toxicityfrom prior intra-thecal methotrexate use ^(k)CAR-modified T cellsmanufactured from CD4⁺ T cells and central memory enriched CD8⁺ T cells^(l)Cy/Flu regimens include both cyclophosphamide and fludarabine

Multivariable analysis showed that preexisting neurologic comorbidities(p=0.0023), along with factors that increase in vivo CAR-T cellproliferation, such as Cy/Flu lymphodepletion (p=0.0259), higher infusedCAR-T cell dose (p=0.0009), and higher burden of malignant CD19⁺ B cellsin marrow (p=0.0165) were associated with an increased risk ofneurotoxicity (Table 3).

Example 5 Severe Neurotoxicity Associated with Severe Cytokine ReleaseSyndrome and Systemic Vascular Dysfunction

Consistent with the baseline factors that were associated with moresevere neurotoxicity, patients who developed grade≥3 neurotoxicity werefound to have more severe CRS (p<0.0001; FIG. 1C), and earlier andgreater CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ CAR-T cell expansion in blood compared to thosewith grade≤2 neurotoxicity (FIG. 3A). Patients with grade≥3neurotoxicity also had earlier and higher fever, more severe vascularinstability and tachypnea, more severe hypoproteinemia, hypoalbuminemiaand weight gain, consistent with loss of vascular integrity and systemiccapillary leak (FIG. 3B). Severe neurotoxicity was also accompanied bydisseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC), with elevated prothrombintime (PT), activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) and d-dimerbeginning 2-5 days after CAR-T cell infusion, prolongedthrombocytopenia, and a late reduction in fibrinogen to a nadirapproximately 1-2 weeks after CAR-T cell infusion (FIG. 3C). Theseverity of neurotoxicity correlated with higher peak concentrations ofCRP, ferritin, and multiple cytokines, including those that activateendothelial cells, such as IL-6, IFN-γ, and TNF-α (FIGS. 3D and 3E). Inline with the association between early onset CRS and later developmentof severe neurotoxicity (FIG. 1D), an earlier peak of IL-6 serumconcentration was associated with a higher risk of grade≥4 neurotoxicity(FIG. 3F). Within the first 6 days after infusion of CAR-modified Tcells, 5 of 5 patients (100%) with an IL-6 concentration≥501 pg/mLdeveloped grade≥4 neurotoxicity, whereas only 2 of 11 patients (18%) whoreached the same serum IL-6 concentration more than 6 days after CAR-Tcell infusion developed grade≥4 neurotoxicity.

These data indicate that neurotoxicity is associated with early onset ofhigh concentrations of serum cytokines and vascular dysfunction.

Example 6 Endothelial Activation in Patients with Acute NeurotoxicityBefore and after Infusion with CD19-Specific CAR-Modified T Cells

The presence of vascular dysfunction and DIC indicated that endothelialactivation might be present in patients with severe neurotoxicity. Theangiopoietin (Ang)-Tie2 axis regulates the balance between endothelialquiescence and activation (Page and Liles, Virulence 4:507-16, 2013).Ang-1 is produced constitutively, primarily by vascular pericytes, andfavors endothelial cell quiescence and stabilization when bound to theendothelial Tie2 receptor. Ang-2 is stored in endothelial Weibel-Paladebodies and released upon endothelial cell activation by stimuliincluding inflammatory cytokines. Ang-2 displaces Ang-1 from Tie2,resulting in activation of pro-thrombotic and pro-inflammatory pathwaysand increased microvascular permeability. The concentrations of Ang-2and Ang-1 in serum from patients after CAR-T cell infusion wereevaluated, and it was found that the serum Ang-2 concentration(p=0.0003) and the Ang-2:Ang-1 ratio (p=0.0014) were higher in patientswith grade≥4 neurotoxicity compared to those with grade≤3 neurotoxicity(FIG. 4A). To confirm the presence of in vivo endothelial activation inpatients with severe neurotoxicity, the serum concentration of vonWillebrand Factor (vWF) antigen (vWF Ag) was evaluated, a glycoproteinin hemostasis that, like Ang-2, is also stored in Weibel-Palade bodiesin endothelial cells and released in response to endothelial cellactivation (Schwameis et al., Thromb. Haemost. 113:708-18, 2015).Compared to patients without neurotoxicity or with grade0-3neurotoxicity after infusion of CAR-modified T cells, those with grade≥4neurotoxicity had higher concentrations of vWF Ag in serum (P=0.004),which in some patients was 4-5 fold higher than those observed in pooledserum from healthy donors (FIG. 4B). IL8 was sequestered with vWF inWeibel-Palade bodies and was also elevated during severe neurotoxicity(FIG. 3E). These findings, including marked elevations in both Ang-2 andvWF Ag, indicate profound endothelial activation and Weibel-Palade bodyrelease during severe neurotoxicity.

Ang-2 and Ang-1 concentrations in serum from patients prior tocommencing lymphodepletion chemotherapy were evaluated to examinewhether patients with evidence of endothelial activation beforeembarking on CAR-T cell immunotherapy might be at higher risk ofsubsequent cytokine-mediated vascular injury and neurotoxicity. TheAng-2:Ang-1 ratio was higher in patients who subsequently developedgrade≥4 neurotoxicity compared with those with grade≤3 neurotoxicity(FIG. 4C), indicating that before lymphodepletion, biomarkers ofendothelial activation might identify patients at high risk ofsubsequent neurotoxicity. Furthermore, in paired samples between day 0and day 1 after CAR-T cell infusion, the magnitude of the change inAng-2 concentration correlated with increasing severity of subsequentneurotoxicity (grade0-2, median 80 ng/mL; grade3, median 394 ng/mL;grade≥4, median 6,392 ng/mL; P=0.0039), indicating that endothelialactivation occurs early after CAR-T cell infusion and precedes the onsetof neurotoxicity (FIG. 1D).

To determine whether endothelial cell activation is induced by serumfrom patients who had received CAR-T cell infusions, serum was collectedfrom normal donors and from patients with neurotoxicity 3-5 days afterCAR-T cell infusion and each were examined for their ability to induceendothelial cell activation. Serum from the patients with neurotoxicitywas found to induce a higher formation of strings comprising plateletsand vWF bound to human vascular endothelial cells (HUVECs) compared toserum from normal donors (FIG. 4D and data not shown). vWF-plateletstring unit formation was examined in HUVECs incubated with serumcollected at least 7 days after infusion of CAR-modified T cells. LowervWF string unit formation was observed for serum from patients withgrade≥4 neurotoxicity compared to serum from patients with grade0-3neurotoxicity, despite the presence of higher concentrations of IL-6,IFN-γ, Ang-2, and vWF Ag in patients with grade≥4 neurotoxicity (FIG.4E). Patients with grade≥4 neurotoxicity were observed to have a lowerfraction of HMW vWF multimers in serum and a higher fraction of LMW vWFmultimers compared to those with grade≤3 neurotoxicity (FIG. 4F), whichmay be due to consumption of the UMW vWF multimers that occurs duringacute presentations of thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP).

In this regard, the level and activity of ADAMTS13 was also examinedsince ADAMTS13 is a protease that cleaves HMW vWF from activatedendothelium (Schwameis et al., 2015). When the ADAMTS13 activity wasnormalized to the vWF Ag serum level (ADAMTS13:vWF Ag ratio), it wasdiscovered that the ADAMTS13:vWF Ag ratio was lower during grade≥4neurotoxicity than observed in those with grade≤3 neurotoxicity (grade≥4versus ≤3; 26% vs 36%; p=0.0023), indicating that patients with grade≥4neurotoxicity inefficiently remove bound HMW vWF multimers fromactivated endothelium.

Together, these data indicate that serum from patients with CRS inducesactivation of endothelial cells, which release and bind vWF, and insevere cases cause sequestration of BMW vWF multimers and contributes toconsumptive coagulopathy.

Example 7 Blood-Brain Barrier During Acute Neurotoxicity

The presence of endothelial activation and systemic capillary leakraised the possibility that severe neurotoxicity was associated withincreased permeability of the blood-brain barrier (BBB). No evidence wasfound on cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) analyses to indicate thatneurotoxicity after CD19-specific CAR-modified T cell therapy wasassociated with central nervous system (CNS) infection, and only onepatient had concurrently detected CSF leukemia and neurologic signs. InCSF collected during acute neurotoxicity, a high protein concentrationand leukocyte count was observed in comparison to CSF collected beforelymphodepletion, consistent with increased permeability of the BBB (FIG.5A). Both CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ CAR-T cells were detected in the CSF by flowcytometry (CD4⁺/EGFRt⁺, median 2.6 cells/μL; CD8⁺/EGFRt⁺, median 2.1cells/μL). CAR-modified T cells comprised a higher fraction of the CD4⁺T cell subset in CSF compared to their counterparts in blood, indicatingthat the BBB might be more permeable to CD4⁺ CAR-T cells (FIG. 5B). CD4⁺and CD8⁺ CAR-T cells persisted in CSF at high frequency in a subset ofpatients after recovery from and/or stabilization of neurotoxicity, butwere infrequent in CSF from patients who had not previously developedneurotoxicity (FIG. 5C).

These CSF results are consistent with increased permeability of the BBBduring neurotoxicity, allowing increased transit of protein and CAR-Tcells.

Serum cytokines can access the CSF through saturable transporters,circumventricular organs, and during BBB breakdown (Yarlagadda et al.,Psychiatry 6:18-22, 2009). To determine whether increased BBBpermeability during severe CRS would permit transit of serum cytokinesinto the CSF, cytokine concentrations were evaluated in paired blood andCSF samples before lymphodepletion and during acute neurotoxicity. Priorto lymphodepletion, there was a detectable cytokine concentrationgradient between blood and CSF, with IFN-γ, TNF-α, and TNF-α stabilizingsoluble receptors, TNFR p55 and TNFR p75, being higher in blood (FIG.5D). During acute neurotoxicity, the concentrations of IFN-γ, TNF-α,IL-6, and TNFR p55 had increased and were comparable between serum andCSF, which indicated that either the BBB did not protect the CSF fromhigh serum cytokine concentrations or there was local cytokineproduction in the CSF (FIG. 5D).

High concentrations of cytokines in the CSF might activate brainvascular pericytes, which together with endothelial cells play animportant role in maintenance of the BBB (Armulik et al., Nature468:557-61, 2010; Rustenhoven et al., Trends Pharmacol. Sci. 38:291-304,2017). Compared to incubation in medium alone, incubation of primaryhuman brain vascular pericytes with IFN-γ at concentrations observed inpatients with severe neurotoxicity resulted in secretion of more IL-6and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF; FIG. 5E), each of whichactivates endothelial cells and further increases BBB permeability (Pageand Liles, 2013). Incubation of pericytes with TNF-α increasedproduction of IL-6, but there was not a significant increase in VEGF(FIG. 5E). IFN-γ also induced downregulation of PDGFRβ and upregulationof cleaved caspase-3 expression, consistent with induction of pericytestress (FIG. 5F) (Rustenhoven et al., 2017).

Together, these findings show that increased permeability of the BBBallows high concentrations of serum cytokines to transit into the CSF,including IFN-γ and TNF-α, which induces pericyte stress and secretionof cytokines that could further amplify increased BBB permeability.

Example 8 Endothelial Activation and Vascular Disruption in FatalNeurotoxicity

Autopsy tissue from two patients who developed fatal CRS andneurotoxicity after CD19-specific CAR-modified T cell therapy wasexamined to determine if endothelial activation and vascular injuryoccurred in the brain during severe neurotoxicity.

One patient died 13 days after CAR-T cell infusion with CRS andneurotoxicity characterized by brainstem hemorrhage and edema.Examination for neuropathology revealed multifocal microhemorrhages andpatchy parenchymal necrosis in the pons, medulla and cervical spinalcord. Red blood cell (RBC) extravasation from multiple affected andnon-affected vessels was observed in areas of otherwise normal brain(FIG. 6A). Small areas of infarction were associated with more severevascular lesions with fibrinoid vessel wall necrosis, RBC extravasation,and perivascular CD8⁺ T cell infiltration (FIGS. 6B and 6C). Flowcytometry showed that 93% of T cells in the pons were CAR-modified Tcells (CD4⁻/CD8⁺ CAR-T cells, 51.9%: CD4⁺/CD8⁻ CAR-T cells, 48.1%). Ofthe CD45⁺ cells in CSF collected at autopsy, 82% were CD3⁺ T cells andof these 94.9% were CAR-T cells (CD4⁻/CD8⁺ CAR-T cells, 48%: CD4⁺/CD8⁻CAR-T cells, 42.5%). We also observed intravascular vWF binding andCD61⁺ platelet microthrombi (FIG. 6D, E), consistent with endothelialactivation and intravascular coagulation. CD31 immunohistochemistry(IHC) demonstrated disrupted endothelium in some vessels (FIG. 6F).Reactive microglia were noted in a perivascular distribution, but markedand diffuse microglial activation was not observed and no CD79a⁺ tumorcells were detected (data not shown). The brain of a patient who dieddue to severe CRS with multi-organ failure and grade4 neurotoxicity (onday 3 after CAR-T cell infusion) showed disrupted endothelium by CD31immunohistochemistry and endothelial cell activation as confirmed byintravascular vWF binding and CD61⁺ platelet microthrombi. Furtherevidence of breach of the BBB included red blood cell extravasation frommultiple vessels, vascular lesions with karyorrhexis, perivascular CD8⁺T cell infiltration, and fibrinoid vessel wall necrosis. CAR-T cellswere detected in the CNS.

Example 9 Identification of Patients at High Risk of SubsequentNeurotoxicity

Early identification of patients at risk of developing severeneurotoxicity might allow intervention with tocilizumab and/orcorticosteroids, enabling reduction in serum cytokine concentrationsthat could mitigate or prevent subsequent toxicity. Fever of ≥38.9° C.occurring within 36 hours of CAR-T cell infusion had a 100% sensitivityfor subsequent grade≥4 neurotoxicity; however, the specificity was only82%, in part due to the risk of fever associated withchemotherapy-induced neutropenia and infection. Because IL-6, IFN-γ,MCP-1, IL-15, IL-10, and IL-2 were higher (p<0.001) within the first 36hours after CAR-T cell infusion in those who subsequently developedgrade≥4 neurotoxicity, evaluation of serum cytokines was investigated asa way to identify patients at risk of severe neurotoxicity with greaterspecificity as compared to evaluating temperature alone within 36 hoursof CAR-T cell infusion. Classification tree modeling demonstrated thatpatients with fever≥38.9° C. and serum IL-6 at ≥16 pg/mL and MCP-1 at≥1343.5 pg/mL in the first 36 hours after CAR-T cell infusion were athigh risk of subsequent grade≥4 neurotoxicity (sensitivity 100%;specificity 94%; FIG. 7 ). Only 8 of 133 patients were misclassified inthis model, and of those, only one (0.75%) did not subsequently developmoderate or severe grade 2-3 neurotoxicity and/or grade≥2 CRS,indicating that unnecessary early intervention guided by theclassification tree model is rare.

The best approach for prediction of severe toxicity would identifypatients at high risk of toxicity before they commence therapy, when theinfused CAR-modified T cell dose or treatment plan could be modified.Evidence of endothelial activation before embarking on CAR-T cellimmunotherapy could identify patients at high risk of subsequentcytokine-mediated vascular injury and neurotoxicity. Serum Ang-1 andAng-2 concentrations were evaluated in patients prior to commencinglymphodepletion chemotherapy and the Ang-2:Ang-1 ratio was higher inpatients who subsequently developed grade≥4 neurotoxicity compared tothose with grade≤3 neurotoxicity (FIG. 7B). Similarly, as shown inExample 6 above, an elevated level of vWF Ag, as with both Ang-2, and areduced ADAMTS13:vWF Ag ratio also indicate profound endothelialactivation and Weibel-Palade body release.

These data indicate that prior to commencing lymphodepletion andCAR-modified T cell immunotherapy, biomarkers of endothelial activationand Weibel-Palade body release can identify patients at high risk of CRSand/or neurotoxicity, providing an opportunity to modify therapy andminimize the risk of severe toxicity.

Example 10 Incidence and Kinetics of CRS and Neurotoxicity

One hundred and thirty-three (133) patients with relapsed or refractoryB cell malignancies were included in the analyses (B-ALL, n=47; NHL,n=62; CLL, n=24). The median age was 54 years (range 20-73) and themedian number of prior therapies was 4 (range 1-11; Table A).Twenty-five patients (19%) had previously undergone allogeneichematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HCT), 22 (17%) had undergoneautologous HCT, and 3 (2%) had undergone both autologous and allogeneicHCT. The lymphodepletion regimens given prior to CAR-T cell infusion areshown in Table 1. A majority of patients (78%) received a regimencontaining both Cy and Flu. Thirty-five (26%) patients received CAR-Tcells infused at DL1, 86 (65%) received DL2, and 12 (9%) received DL3.

CRS of any grade developed in 93 of 133 patients (70%; Table A). Amajority of patients (123 of 133; 92.5%) had either no CRS (grade0, 30%)or grade1-3 CRS (grade1, 26%; grade2, 32%; grade3, 4.5%). Ten patients(7.5%) developed grade≥4 CRS (grade4, 3.8%; grade5, 3.8%) (FIG. 8 ).Five of these patients died within the first 30 days after CAR-T cellinfusion as a result of complications associated with CRS and/orneurotoxicity. One additional patient died 4 months after CAR-T cellimmunotherapy due to irreversible neurotoxicity. Of the 10 patients(7.5%) with grade≥4 CRS, 8 were treated during the dose-escalation phaseof the study. After establishing the CAR-T cell maximum tolerated dose(MTD), grade≥4 CRS was only observed in 2 of 79 patients (2.5%).

TABLE A Univariate and Multivariable Analysis of Baseline and Therapy-Related Characteristics by Severity of CRS. Univariate MultivariableAnalysis Analysis CRS Grade 0 1-3 4-5 Total P value ^(a) P value ^(b)Number of Patients, n 40 83 10 133 Age, years  .55 — Median [IQR] 56 5453.5  54 [44, 65] [43, 61] [43, 62] [43, 62] Range 27, 70 20, 73 20, 70 20, 73 Sex, n (%)  .79 — Male 28 (30) 59 (63)  6 (7)  93 (70) Female 12(30) 24 (60)  4 (10)  40 (30) Karnofsky  .30 — Performance, n (%) 60-70 2 (14) 10 (71)  2 (14)  14 (10) 80-90 32 (30) 67 (63)  7 (7) 106 (80)100  6 (46)  6 (46)  1 (8)  13 (10) Disease Type, n (%)  .30 — ALL 12(25) 31 (66)  4 (9)  47 (35) CLL  4 (17) 18 (75)  2 (8)  24 (18) NHL 24(39) 34 (55)  4 (6)  62 (47) Prior Lines of Therapy,  .13 — n Median[IQR]  3 [2, 5]  4 [3, 5]  5 [3, 7]  4 [3, 5] Range  1, 11  1, 11  2, 9 1, 11 Prior Transplant, n (%)  .38^(c) — Allogeneic only  3 (12) 21(84)  1 (4)  25 (19) Autologous only  9 (41) 11 (50)  2 (9)  22 (17)Both  0 (0)  3 (100)  0 (0)  3 (2) Marrow Disease Burden <.0001 <.0001by Flow Cytometry, % Median [IQR]  0 20 21  1.3 [0, 1.3] [0, 65] [3.6,40] [0, 42] Range  0, 79  0, 97  0, 89.8 0, 97 Not involved, n (%) 23(47) 25 (51)  1 (2)  49 (37) CD19+ Cells in Marrow  .0001^(d) — Numberof Patients, n 40 83 10 133 by Flow Cytometry, % Median [IQR]  3.6 22 22 8.8 [1.3, 6.6] [3.0,66] [11,40] [2.2, 48] Range  0, 79  0, 99  0.3, 90 0, 99 Platelet Count, 1000/μl  .002  .05 Median [IQR] 98 69 32  77 [58,159] [38, 119] [19, 85] [40, 133] Range 11, 265  1, 553  5, 162  1, 553CD8⁺ Selection  .001  .03 Method, n (%) Bulk CD8⁺  9 (15) 47 (77)  5 (8) 61 (46) Central Memory 31 (43) 36 (50)  5 (7)  72 (54) EnrichedLymphodepletion, n  .67  .02 (%) Cy/Flu based 30 (29) 65 (62)  9 (9) 104(78) Non-Cy/Flu based 10 (35) 18 (62)  1 (3)  29 (22) CAR-T Cell Dose, n .002  .003 (%) 2 × 10⁵ EGFRt⁺ 10 (29) 25 (71)  0 (0)  35 (26) cells/kg2 × 10⁶ EGFRt⁺ 27 (31) 54 (63)  5 (6)  86 (65) cells/kg 2 × 10⁷ EGFRt⁺ 3 (25)  4 (33)  5 (42)  12 (9) cells/kg Lymphodepletion/CAR-  .03  .009T Cell Dose Interaction Effect^(e) ^(a) Two-sided P-values calculatedbased on Kruskal-Wallis test for continuous variables, and Fisher'sExact test for categorical variables. ^(b) Step-wise multivariableproportional odds models were performed to assess impact of baselinefactors on the occurrence of CRS (Grade 0 vs 1-3 vs 4-5), where log₁₀values were used to transform data as appropriate, with 0.001substituting for values of 0. ^(c)Any transplant type versus notransplant. ^(d)Since marrow disease burden and total CD191 cells inmarrow have a strong correlation (r = 0.99, P <.0001), only marrowdisease was included in the multivariable analysis. ^(e)The interactioneffect demonstrates that at increasing CAR-T cell dose levels theincorporation of Flu into the lymphodepleting regimen has a greaterassociation with CRS.

Fever≥38° C. was the first objective sign of CRS with the exception ofone patient who presented with hypotension without fever. Fever onsetoccurred a median of 2.2 days [interquartile range, IQR, 0.9-5.6] afterCAR-T cell infusion and lasted for a median [IQR] of 3.0 days [range of1.2-4.8 days] (see Table 4).

TABLE 4 Characterization of Fever in Patients who Develop CRS CRS Grade1-3 4-5 Total P value^(a) Number of 83 10 92 Patients, n Fever Onset(days after <0001 CAR-T cell infusion) Median [IQR] 3.9 [0.8, 5.6] 0.4[0.3, 0.9] 2.2 [0.9, 5.6] Range 0.1, 19 0.2, 1.0 0.1, 19 Time to Peak.001 Temperature (days after CAR-T cell infusion) Median [IQR] 5.7 [4.3,7.6] 2.8 [1.3, 3.2] 5.3 [3.4, 7.3] Range 0.2, 30 0.4, 11 0.2, 30 Maximum<0001 Temperature (° C.) Median [IQR] 39.4 [39.2, 40.4 [40.1, 39.5[39.2, 30.6] 40.6] 39.8] Range 37.7, 41.3 39.9, 40.9 37.7, 41.3 FeverDuration .03 (days after first fever) Median, [IQR] 2.5 [1.2, 4.7] 4.4[3.6, 5.4] 3.0 [1.2, 4.8] Range 0.02, 15 3.1, 6.8 0.02, 15 ^(a)Two-sidedP-values calculated based on Wilcoxon test.

Compared to patients with grade1-3 CRS, fever in patients with grade≥4CRS presented earlier after CAR-T cell infusion (P<0.0001), peakedearlier (P=0.001), reached a higher maximum temperature (P<0.0001), andwas of longer duration (P=0.03, Table 4, FIGS. 9A and 9B). All patientswho ultimately had grade≥4 CRS were febrile within 25 hours after CAR-Tcell infusion, and only 4 patients with grade≤3 CRS developed theirfirst fever more than 12 days after CAR-T cell infusion (FIG. 9A).Fifty-three of 133 patients (40%) had one or more grade≥1 neurologic AEs(grade1-2, 18%; grade≥3, 21%), and the severity of neurotoxicity wasassociated with the severity of CRS (P<0.0001; Table 5); all patientswith grade≥4 CRS also developed grade≥3 neurotoxicity (FIG. 9C).Neurotoxicity typically presented after CRS (P=0.003), with the firstneurologic AE of any grade presenting a median [IQR] of 4 [2-7] daysafter CAR-T cell infusion (FIG. 9D). The first grade neurologic AEpresented 4.5 days [range of 3.2-6.2 days] after the first fever.

TABLE 5 Hospitalization and Neurotoxicity based on Severity of CRS CRSGrade 0 1-3 4-5 Total P value^(a) Total, n 40 83 10 133 Days inHospital, n <.0001 Median [IQR] 0 [0, 3] 9 [6, 17] 18 [7, 43] 7 [3, 14]Range 0, 227 0, 96 3, 98 0, 227 Neurotoxicity, n (%) <.0001 Grade 0 33(41) 48 (59) 0(0) 81 (61) Grade 1-2 5(21) 19 (79) 0(0) 24(18) Grade 3-50(0) 18 (64) 10 (36) 28 (21) B cell Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia, n 1231 4 47 Days in Hospital, n .0002 Median [IQR] 0 [0, 2] 11 [6, 18] 24[4, 71] 7 [3, 17] Range 0, 227 3, 96 3, 98 0, 227 Neurotoxicity, n (%).001 Grade 0 10 (46) 12 (54) 0(0) 22 (47) Grade 1-2 2(18) 9(82) 0(0) 11(23) Grade 3-5 0(0) 10 (71) 4(29) 14 (30) Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma, n 2434 4 62 Days in Hospital, n 0 [0, 3] 7 [5, 12] 18 [16,24] 6[1, 10]<.0001 Median [IQR] Range 0, 20 2, 32 13, 30 0, 32 Neurotoxicity, n (%)21 (50) 21 (50) 0(0) 42 (68) <.0001 Grade 0 Grade 1-2 3(25) 9(75) 0(0)12(19) Grade 3-5 0(0) 4(50) 4(50) 8(13) Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia, n4 18 2 24 Days in Hospital, n 0 [0, 2] 12 [7, 19] 28 [7, 49] 9 [5, 19].007 Median [IQR] Range 0,3 4, 42 7, 49 0, 49 Neurotoxicity, n (%) 4(25)12 (75) 0(0) 16 (67) .13 Grade 0 Grade 1-2 0(0) 2(100) 0(0) 2(8) Grade3-5 0(0) 4(67) 2(33) 6(25) ^(a)Two-sided p-values calculated based onKruskal-Wallis test.

One hundred and nine patients (82%) received lymphodepletionchemotherapy and CAR-T cell infusion in the outpatient setting. In thosewho developed grade≥4 CRS, the severity of CRS did not reach grade≥3until a median of 3.4 days (range 1.4-4.7 days) after the onset offever, which provided sufficient time for hospital admission andtherapeutic intervention at the first fever prior to the development ofmore severe toxicity. The median [IQR] duration of hospitalization forall patients was 7 days [range of 3-14 days] and was associated with theseverity of CRS (grade0, median 0 days; grade1-3, 9 days; grade≥4, 18days; P<0.0001, Table 5). Twenty-six patients (20%) with CRS and/orneurotoxicity received tocilizumab and/or dexamethasone to treat CRSand/or neurotoxicity. Twenty patients received dexamethasone andtocilizumab, 5 received dexamethasone alone, and one receivedtocilizumab alone. Fever resolved a median [IQR] of 0.4 [0.2-2.0] daysfollowing the first dose of tocilizumab or dexamethasone.

Example 11 Vascular Instability and Organ Dysfunction in Patients withSevere CRS

After CAR-T cell infusion, patients with severe CRS exhibitedhemodynamic instability and capillary leak with hypotension,tachycardia, tachypnea, hypoalbuminemia, hypoproteinemia and weight gain(FIGS. 10A-10G). Seventeen of 133 patients (13%) were admitted to theintensive care unit (ICU) for management of CRS and/or neurologic AEsand the median [IQR] duration of care in the ICU was 3 days [range of2-7 days]. Eleven of 133 patients (8%) received vasopressor support.Five patients were intubated and ventilated to manage respiratoryfailure associated with severe neurotoxicity, 3 were ventilated formanagement of pulmonary dysfunction, and 2 due to disease progression.

All patients with grade≥4 CRS developed grade≥3 non-neurologic organtoxicity secondary to CRS, which resolved a median of 24 days (range12-32 days) after resolution of fever. Only 3 patients with grade≤3 CRSdeveloped grade3 non-neurologic organ toxicity (2 hepatic, 1 cardiac),and these events resolved in 1-2 days. Nine of the 10 patients withgrade≥4 CRS developed hepatic dysfunction, manifest by elevated AST,ALT, ALP, and bilirubin, with 5 patients having grade≤3 transaminaseelevation (FIGS. 14A-14D). The AST peaked between days 2-5, whereas theALT, ALP and total bilirubin peaked later at day 6-8. One patientdeveloped late hepatic dysfunction on day 20 associated with severehypotension due to gastrointestinal hemorrhage. Three of the 10 patientswith grade≥4 CRS developed grade≥3 acute kidney injury, with one patientrequiring hemodialysis for 15 days until recovery of renal function(FIGS. 14E and 14F).

Example 12 Delayed Hematopoietic Recovery in Patients with Grade≥4 CRS

Hematopoietic recovery in patients who had received lymphodepletionchemotherapy and CAR-T cell infusion was evaluated. To ensure observeddifferences in hematopoietic toxicity in patients with distinct gradesof CRS were not due to differences in intensity of the lymphodepletionregimen, only patients who received Cy/Flu lymphodepletion (n=104) wereincluded in the analysis. The absolute neutrophil count (ANC),hematocrit (HCT), hemoglobin concentration (Hb) and platelet countdeclined after lymphodepletion, reaching nadirs day 2-5 after CAR-T cellinfusion (FIGS. 11A-D), which were lower in patients with more severeCRS. Patients with grade≥4 CRS received more platelet (P=0.002) and redcell (P=0.04) transfusions than those with grade≤3 CRS (FIG. 11E); 5 of10 patients with grade≥4 CRS were refractory to platelet transfusion.The time to hematologic recovery was longer than expected in mostpatients with grade4 CRS (Table 6), and was delayed in patients withgrade1-3 CRS (median [IQR] 13.5 days [range of 6.5-18.1 days] comparedto those without CRS (median [IQR], 4.1 days [range of 2.9-7.5 days],P=0.0002).

TABLE 6 Hematopoietic Recovery in Patients with Grade 4 CRS Blood andMarrow Recovery (days after before CAR-T cell infusion) Blood and Narrowat Patient Lymphodepletion ANC^(a) Plts^(b) Erythroid^(c) Re-stagingNHL-1 Day -14: ANC 8 18 17 Day 28: ANC 1,420/μL, 1,830/μL, Hb 10.9 g/dL,Hb 9.0g/dL, pits plts 53,000/μL 65,000/μL Marrow: 30-40% Marrow: 40%cellularity cellularity with with trilineage trilineage hematopoiesishematopoiesis; no and low level (5%) evidence of lymphoma or mantle celllymphoma hemophagocytosis. involvement NHL-4 Day-34: ANC 20 —^(d) —^(d)Day 28: ANC 840/μL, Hb 2,370/μL, Hb 9.7 g/dL, 8.5g/dL, pits 19,000/μLpits 72,000/μL Marrow: Marrow: 30-40% 75% cellularity with cellularitywith 0.2% abnormal B cells megakaryocytic hypoplasia Karyotype: 46,XY,t(10; and relative myeloid 13)(p11.2;q34)[2]/46,X hyperplasia; no evidenceY[18] of lymphoma or hemophagocytosis. Karyotype: 46,Y,t(X;3)(2?4;p23),(inv2)(p13q31), t(4;15)(q12;q21)[8]/46,XY [12] CLL-2 Day -14:ANC 770/μL, 37 —^(e) —^(e) Day 28: ANC 50/μL, Hb Hb 9.3 g/dL, plts 8.6g/dL, pits 5,000/μL 33,000/μL Marrow: 5% cellularity, Marrow: Trilineagepredominantly hematopoiesis with lymphocytes and stromal diffuseinvolvement elements; no evidence of (90%) by CLL residual CLL. ALL-2Day-8: ANC 2,310/μL, 52 467 66 Day 22: ANC 750/μL, Hb Hb 11.4 g/dL,8.9g/dL, pits 9,000/μL 139,000/μL Marrow: 20% cellularity Marrow: 50%with megakaryocytic cellularity with aplasia and no evidence oftrilineage hematopoiesis B-ALL or and 26% involvement hemophagocytosis.with ALL infdtrate ALL-3 Day -12: ANC 90/pL, 29 56 104 Day 23: ANC720/μL, Hb Hb 8.1g/dL, 31,000/μL 7.9g/dL, pits 26,000/μL Marrow: 50-60%Marrow: 50% cellularity cellularity with myeloid with relativelyincreased hypoplasia, erythroid erythropoiesis, 10% atypia, and 20-25%erythroid dysplasia and ALL blasts 0.7% myeloid blasts’ Karyotype^(f):Karyotype: 46,XY,del(20)(q11.2ql 46,XY,del(20)(q11.2q13.3)3.3)[4]/46,sl,der(22)t(17; [4]/46,sl,der(22)t(17;22)(q22)(qll.2;ql3)[6]/46,sl, 11.2;ql3)[5]/46,sl,der(15)tder(15)t(15;17)(q26.1;q (15;17)(q25;qll.2)[3]/46,sl,11.2)[4]/46,sl,i(17)(ql0) i(17)(q 10),inc[ 1 ]/46,sl,der[3]/69<3n>,XYY,+l,- (6)t(l;6)(q21;p25)[2]/46,sl, 3del(3)(q24q27),-der(6)t(6;17)(p23;qll.2)[2]/ 4,+add(5)(qll.2),+6,+l46,sl,dup(17)(q21q23)[2] l,add(ll)(q23),-13,- 14,add(15)(q15),-16,-17,+20,+21,+22[cp4] ^(a)Neutrophil recovery was defined as ANC 500/μLfor three consecutive days. ^(b)Platelet recovery was defined asplatelets >50,000/μL and transfusion independence for 7 days.^(c)Erythroid recovery was defined as transfusion independence for 7days. ^(d)NHL-4 had ongoing thrombocytopenia and anemia after CAR-T cellinfusion, and was subsequently diagnosed with therapy relatedmyelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). Karyotype interpretation at day -34states: “since both cells with t(10;13) were seen in the unstimulatedculture, it is possible that this clone may represent a therapy-relatedmyeloid disorder”, suggesting pre-existing MDS. ^(e)CLL-2 died on day 90from pulmonary aspergillus and had ongoing cytopenias with pRBC andplatelet transfusion dependency. ^(f)Therapy-related MDS preceded CAR-Tcell infusion. Karyotype interpretation at day-12 states: “the presenceof two distinct abnormal populations suggests a bi-clonal disease or theconcurrence of two malignancies. The population with 20q- and theevolving clones with 17q gain may suggest the possibility of a myeloidneoplasm.” Karyotype interpretation at day 23 states: “these resultssuggest myeloid disease persistence and progression.” ANC—absoluteneutrophil count; Hb—hemoglobin; pits—platelets

CRS has been associated with macrophage activation syndrome (Lee et al.,Blood 124:188, 2014; Teachey et al., Cancer Dis. 6:664, 2016).^(16, 17)Consistent with this, we observed higher ferritin and CRP levels, andmore prolonged monocytopenia in blood of patients with grade≥4 CRScompared to those with grade≤3 CRS (FIGS. 14G-14I). However, examinationof bone marrow biopsies from patients with grade≥4 CRS showed noevidence that increased hemophagocytosis contributed to delayedhematopoietic recovery. Rather, in 5 of 7 patients with grade≥4 CRS andavailable marrow pathologic examination, the bone marrow washypocellular without evidence of residual tumor (see Table 6).

Consumptive Coagulopathy in Grade≥4 CRS

The prothrombin time (PT), activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT),D-dimer, and fibrinogen was examined in patients at intervals afterCAR-T cell infusion. Patients receiving therapeutic anticoagulation wereexcluded from the analyses (n=9). In the first week after CAR-T cellinfusion, patients with grade≤3 CRS had normal or mildly elevatedprothrombin time (PT), activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT),D-dimer, and fibrinogen. In contrast, those with grade≥4 CRS developedearly prolongation of the PT and aPTT, which peaked approximately 2-5days after CAR-T cell infusion (FIGS. 11F and 11G). Increasing D-dimerand falling fibrinogen concentrations started at day 2-5, withhypofibrinogenemia occurring from days 9-12, consistent withdisseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC; FIGS. 11H and 11I).Compared to their counterparts with grade1-3 CRS, those with grade≥4 CRSreceived more cryoprecipitate transfusions (P<0.0001, FIG. 11E) and hadmore severe and prolonged thrombocytopenia (FIG. 11D). Grade≥3hemorrhage occurred in only 3 patients (2%), all of whom had grade≥4CRS. Red cell fragmentation was not a prominent feature on blood filmmorphology analysis. The findings were consistent with a consumptivecoagulopathy in patients with severe CRS.

Biomarkers of Endothelial Activation in Severe CRS

The presentation of vascular instability, capillary leak, andconsumptive coagulopathy suggested that endothelial activation ordysfunction might be present in patients with severe CRS. This wasconfirmed by demonstrating that severe CRS was accompanied by high serumconcentrations of VWF and Ang-2, which are released from Weibel-Paladebodies on endothelial activation. The mechanisms that lead toendothelial activation in CRS have not been characterized; however, thehigh serum concentrations of endothelium activating cytokines, such asIL-6 and IFN-γ observed in patients with severe CRS suggest that thesecytokines may contribute. The serum VWF and the Ang-2:Ang-1 ratio werealso found to be higher prior to commencing CAR-T cell immunotherapy inpatients who subsequently developed more severe CRS, indicating thatpre-existing endothelial activation might be a previously unrecognizedrisk factor for severe CRS. It is noteworthy that thrombocytopeniabefore lymphodepletion chemotherapy was associated with subsequentsevere CRS.

The presence of vascular instability, capillary leak and a consumptivecoagulopathy raised the possibility that endothelial activation mightcontribute to the clinical findings in patients with severe CRS. VonWillebrand Factor (VWF) is released from Weibel-Palade bodies onendothelial activation, and plays a key role in the initiation ofcoagulation. To determine whether in vivo endothelial activation waspresent in patients with severe CRS, serum concentrations of VWF at thepeak of CAR-T cell expansion in blood was evaluated in a subset ofpatients (n=60; grade0 CRS, n=12; grade1-3 CRS, n=39; grade≥4 CRS, n=9),which showed that patients with grade≥4 CRS had higher VWFconcentrations compared to those with grade≤3 CRS (FIG. 11J). The serumconcentrations of Ang-2 was also evaluated, which is also released fromWeibel-Palade bodies on endothelial activation and promotes capillaryleak, which showed that, like VWF, Ang-2 concentrations were higher inpatients with grade≥4 CRS (FIG. 15A). Ang-1 promotes endothelialstability and an increase in the Ang-2:Ang-1 ratio has been associatedwith morbidity and mortality in sepsis and cerebral malaria (Mikacenicet al., PLoS One 10:1-13, 2015; Page and Liles, Virulence 4:507, 2014;Page et al., J. Infect. Dis. 208:929, 2013; Page et al., Clin. Infect.Dis. 52:e157, 2011; Ricciuto et al., Crit. Care Med. 39:1, 2011;Lovegrove et al., PLoS One 4:e4912, 2009). At the peak of CAR-T cellexpansion in blood, increasing severity of CRS was associated with lowerAng-1, higher Ang-2, and an increased Ang-2:Ang-1 ratio (FIG. 11K; FIG.15A). Of note, before both lymphodepletion and CAR-T cell infusion, andon day 1 after CAR-T cell infusion, increasing serum VWF concentrationwas associated with increased severity of subsequent CRS (FIG. 15B).Furthermore, before lymphodepletion and on day 1 after CAR-T cellinfusion an increased Ang-2:Ang-1 ratio was associated with a higherrisk of developing grade≥4 CRS (FIG. 15C).

In an initial study of 10 patients, similar results were observed forAng-2, Ang-1, Ang-2:Ang-1 ratio, platelet counts, sVCAM1 andsVCAM1:Ang-1 ratio (see FIGS. 16A-16G). Angiopoietin-1, angiopoietin-2and soluble vascular cell adhesion molecule 1 (sVCAM-1) concentrationswere assessed in serum from patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia(ALL), non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) or chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLLtreated) with cyclophosphamide (Cy)-based lymphodepletion chemotherapywith or without fludarabine (Flu) and CD19-targeted chimeric antigenreceptor (CAR)-modified T cells. Samples were collected beforelymphodepletion chemotherapy (Pre-chemo), on the day of CAR-T cellinfusion prior to commencing the infusion (d0), the day after CAR-T cellinfusion (dl), and during acute clinical toxicity 4-8 days after CAR-Tcell infusion (d4-8). Ang-1 (FIG. 16A), Ang-2 (FIG. 16B), sVCAM-1 (FIG.16C), and platelet counts (FIG. 16D) are shown for each patient groupedby severity of neurotoxicity (patients 1-3, grade0; patient 4, grade3;patients 5-10, grade4-5). Patients with grade4-5 neurotoxicity had highAng-2:Ang-1 ratios (FIG. 16E) and high sVCAM-1:Ang-1 ratios (FIG. 16F)during acute toxicity (black) and on the first day after CAR-T cellinfusion (blue), providing an opportunity for early intervention withtreatment with corticosteroids, anti-cytokine antibodies or agents thatmodify the angiopoietin-Tie-VCAM1 pathway. In addition, some patientswho developed grade4-5 neurotoxicity (6, 9, 10) had high Ang-2:Ang-1 orsVCAM-1:Ang-1 ratios before chemotherapy (green) or before CAR-T cellinfusion (red), providing an opportunity to modify chemotherapy or CAR-Tcell dosing and re-evaluate risk before starting therapy.

Together, these data indicate that biomarkers of endothelial activationare elevated during severe CRS, and that even prior to commencinglymphodepletion and CAR-T cell therapy endothelial activation mightincrease the risk of subsequent development of severe CRS.

Patient and Treatment Characteristics Associated with Development andSevere CRS

To identify patients at risk of developing CRS, univariate analyses ofthe impact of baseline characteristics on the development of any gradeof CRS were performed. These analyses showed that patients with highermarrow tumor burden (P<0.0001), a higher percentage of CD19⁺ cells inthe marrow (P=0.0001), and more severe thrombocytopenia (P=0.002) wereat higher risk of developing CRS (Table A). Manufacturing of CAR-T cellsusing bulk CD8⁺ T cells without selection of the central memory subset(P=0.001) and the infused CAR-T cell dose (P=0.002) were associated withincreased risk of CRS. Despite our previous observation that addition ofFlu to Cy in lymphodepletion enhanced in vivo CAR-T cell expansion(Turtle I and II, 2016), this was not associated with increasedoccurrence of CRS in univariate analysis. However, analysis of theinteraction between CAR-T cell dose and Cy/Flu lymphodepletion showedthat addition of Flu at any given CAR-T cell dose increased the risk ofCRS (P=0.03). Stepwise multivariable analysis showed that higher bonemarrow CD19⁺ tumor burden (P<0.0001), more severe thrombocytopenia(P=0.05), bulk CD8⁺ T cell selection (P=0.03), Cy/Flu lymphodepletion(P=0.02), higher CAR-T cell dose (P=0.003), and the interaction effectof CAR-T cell dose and Cy/Flu lymphodepletion (P=0.009) wereindependently associated with development of CRS (Table A). Risk factorsfor CRS within each disease cohort are presented in Tables 7A-C.

TABLE 7A Baseline Characteristics in B cell-ALL Patients CRS SeverityUnivariate Multivariable Analysis Analysis CRS Grade 0 1-3 4-5 Total Pvalue ^(a) P value ^(b) Number of Patients, n 12 31 4 47 Age, years  .94Median, [IQR] 39 40 44 40 [33, 54] [26, 58] [30, 50] [29, 54] Range 27,67 20, 73 20, 52 20, 73 Sex, n (%)  .81 Male  8 (30) 17 (63)  2 (7) 27(57) Female  4 (20) 14 (70)  2 (10) 20 (43) Karnofsky Performance,  .39n (%) 60-70  1 (17)  4 (66)  1 (17)  6 (13) 80-90  9 (24)) 26 (68)  3(8) 38 (81) 100  2 (67)  1 (33)  0 (0)  3 (6) Prior Lines of Therapy, n .08 Median [IQR]  3 [1, 3]  3 [2, 4]  3 [2, 4]  3 [2, 4] Range  1, 5 1, 11  2, 5  1, 11 Prior Transplant, n (%)  .04^(c) .02 Allogeneic  1(6) 15 (88)  1 (6) 17 (36) Marrow Disease Burden  .01 .02 by FlowCytometry, % Median [IQR]  1.5 30 30 21 [0.03, 5.6] [10, 80] [20,41][1.1,58] Range  0,79  0, 97 12, 50  0, 97 Not involved, n (%)  1 (50)  1(50)  0 (0)  2 (4) CD19⁺ Cells in Marrow  .01^(d) by Flow Cytometry, %Median [IQR]  8.3 31 31 26 [3.6, 14] [13,80] [20,42] [8.2, 61] Range  0,79  0.6, 99 13, 50  0, 99 Platelet Count, 1000/μl  .44 Median [IQR] 7966 88 75 [57, 184] [39, 104] [47, 126] [45, 125] Range 19, 244  2, 191 9, 162  2, 244 CD8⁺ Selection Method,  .05 .02 n (%) Bulk CD8⁺  2 (10)16 (76)  3 (14) 21 (45) Central Memory 10 (38) 15 (58)  1 (4) 26 (55)Enriched Lymphodepletion, n (%) 1 Cy/Flu based  9 (26) 22 (65))  3 (9)34 (72) Non-Cy/Flu based  3 (23)  9 (69)  1 (8) 13 (28) CAR-T Cell Dose,n (%)  .08 .009 2 × 10⁵ EGFRt⁺  7 (27) 19(73)  0 (0) 26 (55) cells/kg 2× 10⁶ EGFRt⁺  5 (26) 11 (58)  3 (16) 19 (41) cells/kg 2 × 10⁷ EGFRt⁺  0(0)  1 (50)  1 (50)  2 (4) cells/kg ^(a) Two-sided P-values calculatedbased on Kruskal-Wallis test for continuous variables, and Fisher'sExact test for categorical variables. ^(b) Step-wise multivariableproportional odds models were performed to assess impact of baselinefactors on the occurrence of CRS (Grade 0 vs 1 -3 vs 4-5), where log₁₀values were used to transform data as appropriate, with 0.001substituting for values of 0. ^(c)Any transplant type versus notransplant. ^(d)Since marrow disease burden and total CD19⁺ cells inmarrow have a strong correlation (r = 0.99, P <.0001), only marrowdisease was included in the multivariable analysis.

TABLE 7B Baseline Characteristics in NHL Patients by CRS SeverityUnivariate Multivariable Analysis Analysis CRS Grade 0 1-3 4-5 Total Pvalue ^(a) P value ^(b) Number of Patients, n  24  34   4  62 Age, years.46 Median, [IQR]  60  56  63  58 [52, 64] [52, 61] [52, 67] [52, 63]Range  36, 67  28, 70  43, 70  28, 70 Sex, n (%) .36 Male  17 (35)  29(59)   3 (6)  49 (79) Female   7 (54)   5 (38)   1 (8)  13 (21)Karnofsky .10 Performance, n (%) 60-70   0 (0)   5 (83)   1 (17)   6(10) 80-90  20 (42)  26 (54)   2 (4)  48 (77) 100   4 (50)   3 (37)   1(13)   8 (13) Prior Lines of Therapy, .34 n Median [IQR]   4 [2, 6]   4[3, 5]   5 [4, 8]   4 [3, 5] Range   1, 11   1, 10   4, 9   1, 11 PriorTransplant, n (%) .85 Allogeneic   1 (25)   3 (75)   0 (0)   4 (6)Autologous   9 (41)  11 (50)   2 (9)  22 (35) Both   0 (0)   3 (100)   0(0)   3 (5) NHL Subtype, n (%) .15 Aggressive  17 (39)  26 (59)   1 (2) 44 (71) Follicular   4 (44)   3 (33)   2 (22)   9 (14) Mantle Cell   3(33)   5 (56)   1 (11)   9 (14) Imaging Tumor Bulk, .72 mm² Median [IQR]3019 3133 1752 3000 Range [2005, [1908, [1579, [1773, 5586] 5794] 5352]5627]   0, 8792  124, 17907 1425, 8929   0, 17907 Marrow Disease Burden.06 .008 by Flow Cytometry, % Median [IQR]   0   0   1.9   0 [0, 0] [0,0.2] [0.1, 9] [0, 0.2] Range   0, 1.5   0, 88   0, 14   0, 88 Notinvolved, n (%)  20 (45)  24 (53)   1 (2)  45 (73) CD19⁺ Cells in Marrow.67 by Flow Cytometry, % Median [IQR]   3.4   3.7   6.6   3.6 [1.3, 4.7][0.3, 10] [1.4, 13] [0.6, 5.6] Range   0, 8.2   0, 88   0.32, 15   0, 88Platelet Count, 1000/μl .02 Median [IQR]  97  87  32  87 [56, 158] [44,140] [18, 37] [44, 151] Range  11, 265   1, 53   5, 42   1, 553 CD8⁺Selection .06 Method, n (%) Bulk CD8⁺   5 (21)  17 (71)   2 (8)  24 (39)Central Memory  19 (50)  17 (45)   2 (5)  38 (61) EnrichedLymphodepletion, n .46 .04 (%) Cy/Flu based  17 (35)  28 (57)   4 (8) 49 (79) Non-Cy/Flu based   7 (54)   6 (46)   0 (0)  13 (21) CAR-T CellDose, n .05 (%) 2 × 10⁵ EGFRt⁺   2 (40)   3 (60)   0 (0)   5 (88)cells/kg 2 × 10⁶ EGFRt⁺  19 (40)  28 (58)   4 (8)  49 (79) cells/kg 2 ×10⁷ EGFRt⁺   3 (33)   3 (33)   3 (33)   9 (15) cells/kg ^(a) Two-sidedP-values calculated based on Kruskal-Wallis test for continuousvariables, and Fisher's Exact test for categorical variables. ^(b)Step-wise multivariable proportional odds models were performed toassess impact of baseline factors on the occurrence of CRS (Grade 0 vs1-3 vs 4-5), where logio values were used to transform data asappropriate, with 0.001 substituting for values of 0. ^(c) Anytransplant type versus no transplant. ^(d) Since marrow disease burdenand total CD19⁺ cells in marrow have a strong correlation (r = 0.99, P<.0001), only marrow disease was included in the multivariable analysis.

TABLE 7C Baseline Characteristics in CLL Patients by CRS SeverityUnivariate Multivariable Analysis Analysis CRS Grade 0 1-3 4-5 Total Pvalue ^(a) P value ^(b) Number of Patients, n   4  18   2  24 Age, years .15 Median, [IQR]  67  59   59  61 [63, 69] [53, 64] [55, 62] [54, 65]Range  61, 70  40, 73   55, 62  40, 73 Sex, n (%)  .79 Male   3 (18)  13(76)   1 (6)  17 (71) Female   1 (14)   5 (71)   1 (14)   7 (29)Karnofsky  .71 Performance, n (%) 60-70   1 (50)   1 (50)   0 (0)   2(8) 80-90   3 (15)  15 (75)   2 (10)  20 (83) 100   0 (0)   2 (100)   0(0)   2 (8) Prior Lines of Therapy,  .21 n Median [IQR]   6 [5, 8]   5[4, 7]   7 [7, 7]   5 [4, 7] Range   4, 9   3, 9   7, 7   3, 9 PriorTransplant, n (%) 1 Allogeneic   1 (25)   3 (75)   0 (0)   4 (17) MarrowDisease  .11 .11 Burden by Flow Cytometry, % Median [IQR]   1.8  66   65 62 [0.2, 41] [32, 79] [40, 90] [27, 79] Range   0, 78   0.4, 96   40,90   0, 96 Not involved, n (%)   2 (100)   0 (0.0)   0 (0.0)   2 (8) CD19+ Cells in  .09 Marrow by Flow Cytometry, % Median [IQR]   2  66   65 62 [0.2, 41] [33, 79] [40, 90] [28, 79] Range   0.06, 78   6.7, 96  40, 90   0.06, 96 Imaging Tumor Bulk,  .12 mm Median [IQR] 1115 322611750 3158 [546, [2016, [3093, [1683, 1683] 4753] 20406] 4753] Range 546, 1683 1140, 11057  3093, 20406  546, 20406 Platelet Count, 1000/μl .04 Median [IQR]  133  44   26  51 [110, 136] [26, 88] [19, 32] [28,96] Range  87, 139   7, 170   19, 32   7, 170 CD8⁺ Selection  .06Method, n (%) Bulk CD8⁺   5 (21)   17 (71)   2 (8)  24 (39) CentralMemory  19 (50)   17 (45)   2 (5)  38 (61) Enriched Lymphodepletion, n 1(%) Cy/Flu based   4 (19)   15 (71)   2 (10)  21 (88) Non-Cy/Flu based  0 (0)  3 (100)   0 (0)   3 (12) CAR-T Cell Dose, n  .19 (%) 2 × 10⁵EGFRt⁺   1 (25)  3 (75)   0 (0)   4 (17) cells/kg 2 × 10⁶ EGFRt⁺   3(16)   15 (79)   1 (5)  19 (79) cells/kg 2 × 10⁷ EGFRt⁺   0 (0)   0 (0)  1 (100)   1 (4) cells/kg ^(a) Two-sided P-values calculated based onKruskal-Wallis test for continuous variables, and Fisher's Exact testfor categorical variables. ^(b) Step-wise multivariable proportionalodds models were performed to assess impact of baseline factors on theoccurrence of CRS (Grade 0 vs 1-3 vs 4-5), where log₁₀ values were usedto transform data as appropriate, with 0.001 substituting for values of0. ^(c)Any transplant type versus no transplant. ^(d)Since marrowdisease burden and total CD19⁺ cells in marrow have a strong correlation(r = 0.99, P <.0001), only marrow disease was included in themultivariable analysis.

Risk factors for the occurrence of any grade of CRS that were identifiedin the multivariable model were examined to determine whether thesefactors also impacted the severity of CRS (Table 8). Univariate pairwiseanalysis showed that only Cy/Flu lymphodepletion (P=0.03) and higherCAR-T cell dose (P=0.0003) were associated with the development ofgrade≥4 compared to grade1-3 CRS.

TABLE 8 Univariate Pairwise Analysis of Significant Factors fromMultivariable Proportional Odds Model Univariate Pairwise P-Values CRSGrade 0 vs. 1-3 0 vs. 4-5 1-3 vs. 4-5 % Marrow Burden of disease <.00010.0001 0.8 Platelet Count 0.01 0.005 0.06 CAR-T cell Dose Level 0.70.005 0.0003 Bulk CD8⁺ T cell Selection 0.0005 0.12 0.7 Flu/CyStratified by Dose Level 0.8 0.4 0.03Toxicity Mitigation and Effect on Response Rates by Reduction in PeakCAR-T Cell Counts in Blood Will be Associated with Reduced ResponseRates

The effect on the risk of severe CRS through the use of a reduced CAR-Tcell dose in patients with high tumor burden was examined since CD19antigen drives in vivo CAR-T cell expansion. This strategy was effectivein mitigating toxicity in B-ALL patients without impairing efficacy (seeTurtle et al. I, 2016). However, logistic regression studies indicatedthat the therapeutic window was narrow and that a reduction in CAR-Tcell dose that results in peak CD8⁺ CAR-T cells<10 cells/μL and CD4⁺CAR-T cells<5/μL was likely to result in reduced efficacy. This isparticularly true in NHL, in which the probabilities of CR in grade≥2CRS and grade≥3 neurotoxicity were similar at any given peak CAR-T cellcount.

Consistent with the observation that Cy/Flu lymphodepletion and a highCAR-T cell dose were associated with severity of CRS, earlier and higherpeaks in blood CAR-T cell counts in patients with grade≥4 CRS comparedto grade1-3 or no CRS (FIGS. 12A-12D). To identify in each disease atherapeutic window of CAR-T cell counts that would minimize the risk ofCRS and neurotoxicity while retaining a high probability of anti-tumoractivity, logistic regression was used to examine the relationshipbetween peak CAR-T cell counts in blood and the occurrence of toxicityor disease response (FIGS. 12E-12H). In B-ALL patients achieving a peakof 10 CD8⁺ CAR-T cells/μL, the probability of MRD⁻ CR was 95%, and theprobabilities of grade≥2 CRS and grade≥3 neurotoxicity were 37% and 15%,respectively. Similar findings were noted for patients with 5 CD4⁺ CAR-Tcells/μL (MRD-CR, 94%; grade≥2 CRS, 42%; grade≥3 neurotoxicity, 19%).Reduction of the infused CAR-T cell dose in B-ALL patients with highmarrow tumor burden were improved within in a narrow therapeutic windowand were consistent targeting of peak CAR-T cell counts that wereassociated with high efficacy without undue toxicity (see Table 9).

TABLE 9 Peak CAR-T Cell Level in Blood from B-ALL Patients Stratified byDose Level (DL) and Percentage of Blasts in Bone Marrow Dose level DL2(2 × 10⁶ cells/kg) DL1 (2 × 10⁵ cells/kg) % Marrow Blasts (n) ≤5%(7) >5% (6) ≤5% (5) >5% (14) Peak CAR-T cells/μl 25 315 10 35 CD8⁺Median [IQR] [7.4, 260] [109, 825] [1.3, 15] [15, 170] CD4 ⁺Median [IQR]7.7 16 5.4 5.3 [4.4, 22] [3.8, 27] [1.3,9] [1.3, 15]

The probabilities of marrow response and toxicity in CLL patients weresimilar to those in B-ALL. In NHL patients, a therapeutic window withhigh efficacy and low toxicity could not be established. These dataindicate that CAR-T cell dose reduction as a sole strategy to mitigatetoxicity will lead to reduced efficacy in B-ALL, CLL, and NHL patients,and that early intervention approaches should be taken that do notinvolve reduction in the CAR-T cell dose and peak counts in blood.

Early Identification of Patients at High Risk for Severe CRS

The risk of impaired efficacy with CAR-T cell dose reduction indicatesthat an optimal strategy would enable delivery of an adequate CAR-T celldose, followed by early intervention in those at high risk of subsequenttoxicity. Early onset of fever≥38.9° C. after CAR-T cell infusion was asensitive predictor of subsequent grade≥4 CRS; however, the specificityof fever alone as an indicator for early intervention was low.Classification-tree modeling was used to design a simple two-stepalgorithm to predict grade≥4 CRS, in which serum MCP-1 concentrationswere measured only in patients with fever within 36 hours of infusion.

We investigated whether patients who would subsequently developlife-threatening CRS could be identified early after CAR-T cell infusionwhen early intervention strategies might be instituted. All patients whodeveloped grade CRS had fever≥38.9° C. within the first 36 hours afterCAR-T cell infusion; however, using fever≥38.9° C. within 36 hours as anindication for intervention would have resulted in unnecessary treatmentof 20 patients with grade≤3 CRS (sensitivity 1.00, specificity 0.84).Within 36 hours after CAR-T cell infusion IFN-γ, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10,IL-15, MCP-1, TNFRp55, and MIP-1β concentrations were higher in serumfrom patients who developed grade≥4 CRS compared to grade≤3 CRS(P<0.0001), which were further possible predictive biomarkers forgrade≥4 CRS (FIGS. 13A-13H). Classification tree modeling was performed,which showed that in patients with fever≥38.9° C. within 36 hours ofCAR-T cell infusion, a serum IL-6 concentration≥16 pg/mL, a serum MCP-1concentration≥1343.5 pg/mL enhanced identification of patients whodeveloped grade≥4 CRS (sensitivity 1.00, specificity 0.95) (FIG. 13I).Using this approach, only 4.5% of patients (6/133) were misclassified asat high risk of grade≥4 CRS, 4 of whom developed grade CRS and/orneurotoxicity, indicating that the combination of fever with IL-6 and/orMCP-1 level would sensitively and specifically identify patients at riskof developing CRS and/or neurotoxicity (i.e., unnecessary interventionwould be uncommon in patients who were less likely to develop moderateor severe CRS and/or neurotoxicity). We also investigated whetherpatients with pre-existing endothelial activation were at higher riskfor neurotoxicity. Before lymphodepletion, patients who developed gr≥4NT had higher Ang-2:Ang-1 ratios than those with gr≤3 NT, indicatingthat endothelial activation before lymphodepletion or CAR-T cellinfusion can be used as a risk factor for neurotoxicity that identifiespatients who would benefit from a modified treatment regimen.

In general, in the following claims, the terms used should not beconstrued to limit the claims to the specific embodiments disclosed inthe specification and the claims, but should be construed to include allpossible embodiments along with the full scope of equivalents to whichsuch claims are entitled. Accordingly, the claims are not limited by thedisclosure.

1.-19. (canceled)
 20. A method for diagnosing or detecting the risk ofan adverse event associated with cellular immunotherapy, comprising:measuring the level of an adverse event biomarker of endothelialactivation in a biological sample from a mammalian subject having ahematologic malignancy within about 12 hours to about 48 hours aftercellular immunotherapy, wherein the adverse event biomarker measuredcomprises the subject's temperature, or comprises the subject'stemperature and a cytokine selected from IL-6, CCL2, IFN-γ, IL-10,IL-15, IL-2, or any combination thereof provided that at least IL-6,CCL2 or both cytokine levels are measured; and (ii) identifying thesubject as at risk of developing an adverse event of cytokine releasesyndrome (CRS), neurotoxicity, or both after cellular immunotherapy whenthe subject's temperature is at least 38° C. and the level of IL-6 isincreased at least 2- to 5-fold and/or the level of CCL2 is increased atleast 5- to 20-fold as compared to a normal sample, wherein the at risksubject receives pre-emptive treatment for the adverse event, receivesan altered cellular immunotherapy regimen, or both.
 21. (canceled) 22.The method of claim 20, wherein the measuring comprises measuring thelevel of two, three, four or five adverse event biomarkers.
 23. Themethod of claim 20, wherein the sample is obtained from the subjectwithin 36 hours after cellular immunotherapy.
 24. The method of claim20, wherein the measured adverse event biomarker comprises the subject'stemperature of at least 38.5° C. to at least 39° C., or comprises thesubject's temperature of at least 38.5° C. to at least 39° C., the levelof IL-6 of at least 12 pg/mL to at least 16 pg/mL, and the level of CCL2of at least 1,300 pg/mL to at least 1,350 pg/mL.
 25. The method of claim20, wherein the method further comprises measuring the level of abiomarker of endothelial activation.
 26. The method of claim 25, whereinthe biomarker of endothelial activation comprises a component ofendothelial Weibel-Palade bodies selected from angiopoietin-2, vWF Ag,IL-8, CCL26, endothelin-1, osteoprotegerin, CD142 tissue factor,P-selectin, P-selectin cofactor CD63/LAMP3, PAI-1, α-fucosyltransferaseVI, or any combination thereof.
 27. The method of claim 25, wherein thebiomarker of endothelial activation measured comprises vWF Ag,angiopoietin-2, angiopoietin-1, VCAM-1, or a combination thereof. 28.The method of claim 25, wherein the method further comprises measuring aco-factor to the biomarker of endothelial activation.
 29. The method ofclaim 28, wherein the method comprises measuring the level of vWF Ag andthe co-factor measured comprises ADAMTS13 activity, wherein a ratio ofADAMTS13:vWF Ag that is reduced as compared to a normal sampleidentifies the subject as at risk of developing an adverse eventassociated with cellular immunotherapy.
 30. The method of claim 28,wherein the method comprises (a) measuring the level of angiopoietin-2and the co-factor measured comprises measuring angiopoietin-1 level,wherein a ratio of angiopoietin-2:angiopoietin-1 that is increased ascompared to a normal sample identifies the subject as at risk ofdeveloping an adverse event associated with cellular immunotherapy,and/or (b) measuring the level of VCAM-1 and the co-factor measuredcomprises measuring angiopoietin-1 level, wherein a ratio ofVCAM-1:angiopoietin-1 that is increased as compared to a normal sampleidentifies the subject as at risk of developing an adverse eventassociated with cellular immunotherapy.
 31. The method of claim 20,wherein the pre-emptive treatment for the adverse event or the alteredcellular immunotherapy regimen comprises administering the cellularimmunotherapy at a reduced dose, a corticosteroid, an inflammatorycytokine antagonist, an endothelial cell stabilizing agent, or anycombination thereof.
 32. The method of claim 31, wherein the pre-emptivetreatment for the adverse event comprises administering thecorticosteroid, the inflammatory cytokine antagonist, or both. 33.-40.(canceled)
 41. The method of claim 20, wherein the hematologicmalignancy is selected from Hodgkin's lymphoma, non-Hodgkins lymphoma(NHL), primary central nervous system lymphomas, T cell lymphomas, smalllymphocytic lymphoma (SLL), B-cell prolymphocytic leukemia,lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma, splenic marginal zone lymphoma, plasma cellmyeloma, solitary plasmacytoma of bone, extraosseous plasmacytoma,extra-nodal marginal zone B-cell lymphoma (mucosa-associated lymphoidtissue (MALT) lymphoma), nodal marginal zone B-cell lymphoma, follicularlymphoma, mantle cell lymphoma, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL),mediastinal (thymic) large B-cell lymphoma, intravascular large B-celllymphoma, primary effusion lymphoma, acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL),acute myeloid leukemia (AML), chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL),chronic myoblastic leukemia (CML), Hairy cell leukemia (HCL), chronicmyelomonocytic leukemia (CMML), juvenile myelomonocytic leukemia (JMML),large granular lymphocytic leukemia (LGL), blastic plasmacytoiddendritic cell neoplasm (BPDCN), Burkitt lymphoma/leukemia, multiplemyeloma, Bence-Jones myeloma, non-secretory myeloma, plasmacytoma,amyloidosis, monoclonal gammopathy of unknown significance (MGUS), orWaldenstrom's macroglobulinemia.
 42. The method of claim 20, wherein theadverse event is cytokine release syndrome (CRS), neurotoxicity, orboth.
 43. A kit for use in diagnosing or detecting the risk of anadverse event associated with cellular immunotherapy in a mammaliansubject having a hematologic malignancy, comprising: a binding reagentand detectable agent for measuring the level of a plurality of cytokinesselected from IL-6, CCL2, IFN-γ, IL-10, IL-15, IL-2, or any combinationthereof, provided that reagents for detecting at least IL-6, CCL2 orboth are provided; optionally a device for measuring the subject'stemperature; an optional binding reagent and detectable agent formeasuring the level or activity of a biomarker of endothelial activationselected from angiopoietin-2, angiopoietin-1, VCAM-1, vWF Ag, IL-8,CCL26, endothelin-1, osteoprotegerin, CD142 tissue factor, P-selectin,P-selectin cofactor CD63/LAMP3, PAI-1, α-fucosyltransferase VI,ADAMTS13, angiopoietin-1, or any combination thereof, provided that whenthe binding reagent for angiopoietin-2 or vWF Ag is present, the kitalso contains a reagent for detecting activity of ADAMTS13 or detectingangiopoietin-1, respectively; and optional reagents for performing abinding reaction using the detectable agent, optional instructions forusing the binding reagent and the detectable agent; wherein the subjectis identified as at risk of developing an adverse event associated withcellular immunotherapy when the biomarker of endothelial activation isincreased as compared to a normal sample; or wherein the subject isidentified as at risk of developing an adverse event of cytokine releasesyndrome (CRS), neurotoxicity, or both after cellular immunotherapy whenthe subject's temperature is at least 38° C. and the level of IL-6 isincreased at least 2- to 5-fold and/or the level of CCL2 is increased atleast 5- to 20-fold as compared to a normal sample.
 44. The kit of claim43, wherein the binding reagent comprises a nanobody or a bindingfragment thereof, an antibody or a binding fragment thereof, or a T cellreceptor or a binding fragment thereof.
 45. The kit of claim 43, whereinthe binding reagent is conjugated to a detectable agent.
 46. The kit ofclaim 43, wherein the detectable agent is detectable by one or more of:a colorimetric assay, fluorescence imaging, an enzymatic assay,spectrophotometry, mass spectroscopy, or radiation imaging.
 47. A methodfor treating hematologic malignancy in a mammalian subject, the methodcomprising: (a) obtaining a result from the method of claim 20 todetermine the risk of an adverse event associated with cellularimmunotherapy in the subject; and (b) administering to the subject apre-emptive treatment, an altered cellular immunotherapy regimen, orboth to minimize the risk for the potential adverse event. 48.-49.(canceled)
 50. The method of claim 20, wherein the therapy compriseschemotherapy, combined chemotherapies, biologic therapy, hormonaltherapy, or any combination thereof.
 51. The method of claim 50, whereinthe biologic therapy comprises an antibody, an scFv, a nanobody, afusion protein, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor, an immunoreactive T cell,an immunoreactive Natural Killer cell, or any combination thereof.52.-53. (canceled)